Quote from: franky1 on February 08, 2023, 10:46:24 PM

@JJG
firstly i am not for ordinals
i even provided a easy solution that does work because the core devs done a similar practice in the past which set precedent that its possible and does not involved re-orging the blockchain

and no fees are not the solution.. asking everyone to just pay more is meaningless. as pools can add a ordinal/nft in their own blocktemplate and the fee they pay goes to themselves. thus no cost, no loss. thus fees wont stop it if it costs a pool nothing to add it

secondly using fee as political power is surprising the other groups solution. strangely they used to hate bloat in blocks and wanted a fee "freemarket".. now they want bloat and want a political fee system (facepalm)

my stance has always been bitcoin development on the bitcoin network. where bitcoins exist. to allow more bitcoin payment transactions per block.. its never been about more wasted metadata script nft bloat or crap data bloat. its more payment transaction count utility on the bitcoin network. progressively, not large leaps (to counter most of the stupid insinuations other people think are the only options going forward)

seems they change their stance/opinions to fit the whims of whatever sponsor they meet

as for me providing proof
take the segwit debate. even the core devs admit it was done the way i keep saying it was. they are now proud of it too.. . thus i dont see why the madhatter clan are trying to set a different narrative..
(theirs: there was no split there was no fork there was no controversy, it was all soft and everyone wanted it)

i have shown them even the block data, the bips and the codebase. the mandatory stuff he block rejections the unnatural votes.

they have seen it many times. thus when they try to say silly stuff to try to change history.. after 3 months of chill by them.. they play dumb and forgetful.. they keep then asking me for proof even though they know the answer. they just want me to waste my time showing them the data again. then cry that im the one trying to keep talking about it

but they never show their proofs of their narratives. apart from confirmation bias social quotes from things like other forum people or twitter. so yea i tell them to stop wasting time do some research and come back when they provide proof of their claims because proof of my claims has been provided many many many times
and is easily available

heck even lead maintain Wlad admits core was branded core as a name to be the center of information, development and the reference client (central point of failure) and also on his exist he again admits about he core being central point of failure

yet the madhatter clan are trying to pretend something else.

here is the thing. when i do detail responses of technical stuff including links. most of those posts get deleted. or get told its too technical and to instead ELI-5 it.
or that i am wrong becasue im just rambling some nonsense they cannot understand..
or left in history from years prior. where by new mentions ifthe topic is questioned again.. these new resppnses then get deleted.. which then leaves gaps in the conversation where it looks like i have not mentioned certain things. which some use as pretending that im confusing people by being vague or not complete.

i then re write a brief dumbed down version but try to include links
then i dumb it down a bit more and ask people to do their own research
then i dumb it down more and then get accused of not knowing anything becasue im not scientific enough.. (facepalm)

then i get peed off that the messages are not even given the effort to be read by a mod to even check if the content is valid or not.. to see if it meets the rules. so i do quick blasts of messages which some stick. which is where the confusing small scope snippet bits come in where some people dont get the whole context. because i had to limit the context or the context got deleted

these small brief (non walls of text) messages is where i have not spoonfed all the detail but request people to do some research so that i cant be blamed for me spoonfeeding them bad information or being a dictator
(EG if i responded in 5 messages between 5 other peoples messages and only posts 2 and 4 were kept. it looks messy)

the information exists.. even with just a google search and 30 second of time .. yet certain people would rather spend hours making excuses to avoid simple research or get my posts deleted rather than face the truth that opposes whatever team/company/agenda they are defending

and yes. i have been called synonyms and analogies and comparisons to dictator many times by blackhatter and his work husband doomad. which is why when it comes to anyone being a dictator being mentioned in a topic where its obviously subtle leading to starting a reail accusation related to me being one in further posts
it happens so often you can spot the sliding in of a certain topic to then start a new argument about it..

. i can see the inferences that are ready to be made because its the same game of subtly directing a discussion into dictator finger pointing session. whereby the usual crowd LOVE to then point the finger at me as deflection. so i sometimes beat them to the punch..

again it looks messy. but when they sing the same songs of [subtle buzzword insertion] pre-empting the obvious next phase by calling me the [bussword]. i prefer to skip a few of their chest beats of their singing sessions and just get to the conclusion of their next game.

yes it looks messy but with all the post deletes and such there is no point wasting time playing their game in sync and step by step. i might aswell act like half my messages will be deleted anyway and just get to the conclusion

as for if my post was ontopic or not about the mass of deletes today.
it was about NFT on bitcoin (to which ordinals is the brand name or a type of NFT, which is on bitcoin). and where people were asking about solutions to it. which all my deleted responses in recent days were ontopic and offered a solution

yea achow does not read the posts to check if the rules were met.. he just deletes on sight, if a post is made by my name its deleted.. deleted precisely for that reason
"franky made it"

funny thing is achow is recently(couple months) on a massive power grab. wanting to add extra hierarchy levels of moderation everywhere.. even on github where by he is writing the rule book and making the internal merge privilege devs the mods..

meaning a more closed door circle jerking by the Dev empire..

seems he does not like outside/independent review, scrutiny, critique. he wants a cultish clubhouse of ass kissing ACKers. of the same 3 sponsoring companies (brinks/ chain code labs/blockstream) all pushing for the same roadmap. thus no defiance

but dare i say that. oops just did

seems most of the dozen brethren of the mad hatter defence league have made an appearance in this topic in recent days.. just maybe 2-3 more have yet to chime in to defend their buddies. but yes its the usual crowd im having to spot time and time again.. (no surprise)

I appreciate your various answers here Frank, but it seems that you are even more guilty than me in terms of providing walls of text that tend to devolve into so fucking what?

Let me see if I can explain better. It hardly makes any difference if you are making some arguments in this thread to describe the various ways that you are correct about your perspective in bitcoin, and it also likely does not mean much of anything if you are absolutely correct in your views and the way that you present facts, logic and you come to the most correct conclusions, because you have to persuade the right people to want to act in agreement and concert with you to make the changes that you believe are necessary in order to reach whatever the fuck might happen to be your objective, which in the end would be what? Remember the build up for segwit took place largely in 2016/2017 and some drama triggered signaling at such a level that it passed and then went through a process of getting activating. If you want to undo segwit then it likely has to go through a similar process, but the fact that it has largely been active for more than 5 years and people/companies have been building bitcoin upon it, it is likely not going to get taken out in any kind of way, except maybe some incremental changes could be made if you could achieve some kind of consensus in your view in order to motivate progress to go in the direction that you would like.. so what I am saying is the fact that you might be the smartest person and maybe you are the most correct, you have the burden of proof and the burden of persuasion to motivate others to act in terms of overturning or altering the status quo, so maybe that could be part of the explanation why so many members in this forum get pissed off at you because there seems to be some lack of practicality to be complaining about water that already flowed under the bridge, and I am not even suggesting that some of your other concerns might not be addressable, but it's not like you are going to get a bunch of people to start to agree with you and to act upon your ideas unless you are also getting them to work on your visions and/or projects to the extent that you are able to motivate others...

Do you have a book coming out? or do we just need to read your various posts in order to figure out how we are supposed to act in terms of supporting your various visions, to the extent that any of us might be able to understand how we are supposed to act and that we are motivated to actually take steps in that direction.

Quote from: philipma1957 on February 08, 2023, 11:38:03 PM

Quote from: LoyceV on February 08, 2023, 05:58:21 PM

Quote from: franky1 on February 08, 2023, 05:30:33 PM

( v sarcasm v )
please sir can i have the kings permission to use references that are analogies or synonyms of dictatorial, such as dictate, dictator, totalitarian, oppressor.
( ^ sarcasm ^)

You have a very unfriendly discussion style. Do you enjoy attacking anyone who talks to you?

to be frank about frank he is not rude to me but in general we agree on LN being a possible threat to BTC.

On the topic of NFT and ordinals hurting btc I tend to see some of the threats they could be but as a long time miner I see them clogging blocks and helping miners.

Its funny the frank thinks ln a block de bloat and NFT/ ordinals are both bad.

In a way I kind of think of NFT/ordinals as a sophisticated way to clog the chain to help miners and to counter balance the damage done by LN network and fees for miners.

So In my half assed opinion since frank does not like LN in theory he should like NFT's and ordinals.

I in this particular case I am asking frank do you think my idea of not/ordinal neutralizing LN action is wrong? If so why?

As anyone can see I am not against frank but am interested in what he thinks.

I don't really agree with some of your views Philip in regards to the extent to which these various NFT/ordinals make much if any difference to mining, even though surely there can be ways that they end up taking up block space because some people might get excited to take up space on the blockchain to get their various kinds of messages to go through and to be permanently attached to some UTXOs... ..but I do appreciate some of your ideas in regards to how it seems that franks various positions are contradictory in their nature - especially if frank is opposing various ways that bitcoin transactions have been gravitating to layers outside of the base layer of bitcoin and that the NFT/ordinal scripts promulgated/generated/discovered by Casey Rodarmor do seem to attempt to use bitcoin's base layer rather than going to outside layers..

So yeah it seems that Franky's position is somewhat contradictory - and maybe Franky is suggesting that some of the various software changes that involve both segwit and taproot make these kinds of ordinal/NFTs easier to accomplish so in that sense, he is trying to use such impacts of the software changes as a way to whine about some of those earlier software changes should not have been made in the first place.. so therefore he does not like it.. And, probably I am stating Franky's position incorrectly.. even though, I still did appreciate your (Philip) way of framing the seeming contradictions in Franky's positions as you currently understand them to be.