Is it even fair to ask a rhetorician for concise facts that should be indisputable?
I'm into improving Bitcoin, but I think we need agreement on what is wrong with it and why it should be improved, there are lots of BIS in the pipe, I just what to know what's wrong with Bitcoin that the SC proposal is supposed to fix
"improve"? Ive been doing product development for over 20 years, and if there is one lesson I've learned the hard way it is if it isn't broken don't fix it. not that thats my position with SC's
brg444 could squash my position in 2 words and make my case very tedious to prove, the thought of reading through more A.D.D. rhetoric is not comforting, and I'll probably crawl back into my shell, or he can carry on all A.D.D. like and I wont have to present my position again.
You could at least adress my answers to your questions.
your input confirms my argument, I unfortunately (fortunately actually) have better things to do in a Friday evening, so I won't be taking the time this evening, or this weekend unless your poke my ego.
I'll come back to it as my job permits next week. None the less i gave you an opportunity to think about the 2 words that would make it difficult to prove my case.