what you got to realise is the whole btc bch was all just a fake bit of drama under the fake pretense of choice.

the fork did not use consensus. it did not give a real choice and either way the bscartel would win.
this has been public knowledge since atleast august. it was never going to be a network upgrade. core ensured it by adding the IP ban code.

the devs involved in doing this with core are bing paid by barry silbert
the devs involved in doing this with bch are bing paid by barry silbert

the whole plan was not a choice of upgrading bitcoin to 2mb baseblock. but just to bait and switch the community into adopting the bscartels segwit code and back out of the 2mb base block.

the bscartel got the funding of many millions, purely for the segwit code implementation. and either way this november drama occured. they got what they wanted

if you think the reddit propaganda about winning against corporate control was right... then your wrong
check it out
http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
bloq - jgarzic / gavin A
blockstream - sipa / gmax / luke jr

spoiler alert
bloq(jgarzic) <-> barry silbert(DCG) <-> blockstream(core)

http://dcg.co/portfolio/#b

bch is an altcoin.

price drama is just price drama. a 100% rise and drop is a 100% rise and drop whether the coin is $1000-2000 or $1 -2.. its all the same
EG if a loaf of bread costs 1token or 0.001 token  one day you can get 1 loaf the next you can get two loaves the next only one again..
% change is more important than actual $value


now what people should know, learn and care about is what the coin actually does.
if MERCHANTS start accepting X and stop accepting Y then Y will drop in popularity.

so i personally dont care about the fiat price of coins. all i look at is the utility of the coin to work out how viable its longevity is
and i look at the volatility of the value change % to work out if profit can be made.

right now btc is losing its utility. but at the same time bch is not gaining utility.
unless coinbase/bitpay started using bch for its merchant shopping cart acceptance, then bch is not a long term viable currency.

and with btc losing its merchant adoption numbers, i see both coins having longevity issues as a currency.. and so leaving the coins in the hands of fiat investors seeing them as just investments to grab more fiat

yawn
people only screaming about the price

temporary price drama.
if people are checking the price several times a day, they are literally asking to give themselves mental anxiety issues.

the cure. dont invest more than you fear losing and dont check the price daily

i laugh when people say "what group can i join to do X"
its like asking what cabin can i trap myself in and circle jerk the same thoughts to others who think the same. whereby the outside world hears nothing.

but to answer the OP's question. he can suck eggs with core devs if he really wants to circle jerk the narrow mindset.

P.S if you really idolise decentralisation avoid joining core, avoid grouping yourself together in a small part of the internet, avoid trying to control the narrative with propaganda campaigns and instead spend your time actually learning what things are

ebliever you spend to much time reading the reddit propaganda

maybe you should look at the bloat that gmax wants to throw into bitcoin that would use up 4mb of data but keep transactions at way under 7txps
(research: confidential payment commitments)

yes

first of all move the funds to a new address using bitcoin
this then secures your bitcoin.

but keep the old (2014) privkey that is now empty in bitcoin, thus now it is safe to use elsewhere.
the reason i say that its best to move your btc first. is to avoid replay.

you can then import the 2014privkey into the recent forks software such as bitcoin cash.
because on the bitcoin cash chain, the 0.75 coin will still be linked to that 2014privkey

and then you can move those funds to an exchange that accepts bitcoin cash

you seem to misunderstand alot.. also i have been involved in bitcoin alot longer than you.
what you need to understand is the mining becomes more efficient as time goes on.
what you need to understand is that miners would even mine at a loss because they will gain later
what you need to understand is when some pools drop off there is then more of a slice of the pie for the rest

also if there is only 1mb base block that core want to keep. then thats only 2500 legacy or 4500 segwit tx's
which segwit does 75% discount. meaning fees are equivalent to 1113-2500 tx's a block(at legacy comparison).

so if you think that pools with 12.5btc@$6400 deserve atleast $80k every ~10 mins
and u think that while remaining at 1mb base to keep a network congestion alive.. that pools deserve to keep at $80k or above
then you are literally saying that when the next halving occurs, if btc was still $6400 that the tx fee total should be $40k to subsidise the halving

meaning 1113-2500 tx's = $36-$16 per tx

what would have been much better. is if core while agreeing that 4mb weight is acceptable.. actually gave4mb base block

meaning 10,000 legacy tx's, meaning fee's of at most $4 in the scenario above.

..

any way i truly laugh that core say 2mb is bad but then say 4mb weight is good. purely for their silly bloat features they want
anyway i laugh that they say network congestion is good as it raises the fee pretending pools need the money. while then discounting their silly features

but hey. im betting you have given up wearing a thinking cap of unbiased thought, while reading this message and instead put on a core defence cap and ready to reply with a bitchy post about how core are your gods and you trust their motives.
if so.. dont bother,
 i have heard all the wishy washy sheep defence moans of core devotee's. its nothing new and nothing original

because comments about 'congestion is good' is the economics propaganda of the core crowd trying to twist cores agenda to sound good. when in actuality its not

fee's are not a requirement for mining for 100 years

so for 99 years its a bug that makes users hate using bitcoin

it is a bubble. but what you got to realise is that the housing bubble also had technology and infrastructure, businesses built on top of it.
a bubble is not about vapourware that vanishes into zero value once people realise its valueless.. a bubble is about something real that expands above its natural level based on alot of hot air(speculation).

this means that there is a natural level of value.. and the speculation ontop is the empty expanse that can burst.

with all speculation on assets there will always be a expansion of the price based on pure idiotic speculation/value over pricing.
and when it bursts it doesnt go to zero it just drops to a natural more realistic value, these natural realistic values are found on the markets by 'resistant points', values at which people will refuse to sell at because they deem the asset holds more value. some people call it 'the new low' or 'the new bottom' and yes the housing market did not drop to zero where people could buy a house for 1cent, but it definitely had a bubble and that bubble did burst.

so atleast realise that bitcoin is in a bubble. and know the real issue is that without good real utility. the natural waterline at the bottom of the bubble can decrease. which is why people should care more about the infrastructure, business and utility of bitcoin because without any of that holding the water line up, then when bubbles burst it causes more devastation to the fiat lovers who see the price crash more

5 years.. nah. itll take longer then that.

i know all the countris and banks are all working on thir chain integrations with hyper ledger. but it will take longer than 5 years to get normal people to covert their life savings, to change laws and to become fully using a crypto

at best id say 5 years for the countries to use crypto as the International Monetary Funds SDR platform, and much longer before things drip feed into a citizens hands

segwit has been active for months. the funny part is that the mining pools themselves are afraid to use it.
check out their block reward addresses.. yep not segwit addresses.
btcc and slush were the two main mouth piece advertisers of how much they loved segwit.. and yet, still use legacy addresses for their rewards.


although the pools were arm twisted/paid off into accepting segwit earlier this year due to the subterfuge that it was part of deal to then also upgrade the base block.. now the baseblock has not got the 2x upgrade, we are not really in much of a better legacy position than 2015

even gmaxwell himself cant even get himself to change his own donation address to a segwit address
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=11425
Bitcoin address:    17F6gfDfTXpUdT9g2o3eqSmmwnUsPRokPB

firstly segwit2x was dead as a upgrade proposal back in august.. even back then everyone with sense knew it was an altcoin..

^
proof centralisation has occured and that some people are actually excited by it (facepalm)

core have not used bitcoin consensus in the last few years, and stupid people think its a good thing.
i do hope they sell off and run back to fiat before their ignorance stalls bitcoin upgrades further

now all thats left is waiting another couple years for the legagy block(baseblock) to have another attempt to actually have more utility via more tx's..
meanwhile idiots can put their funds into dual signed addresses and no longer have full control of their funds under false pretence of it being 'better'

segwit2x(b2x) was always intended as an altcoin and not a bitcoin upgrade

it was just a bait and switch to push segwit(core1x) into being accepted after 9 months of objection(from last year). and then backtrack out of the 2x part

core closed off the chance of any community adoption of B2x the same day it was suggested to core.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11128

running altcoin nodes does NOT mean you support bitcoin decentralisation. altcoins are not bitcoin
even as far back as august segwit2x(b2x) was thrown into the altcoin realm.. it was the bscartel plan all along. bait the community to adopt segwit with a promise of 2mb base block.
bcause the community for 9 months refused segwit on its own..

..then backtrack and drop support for 2mb baseblocks by literally ip banning any node that was not cores segwit

its not the first time they done it and wont be the last.

core have gone full dictatorship and all people care about is FIAT value. not bitcoin utility(facepalm)

lol so your taking a stance against centralisation is to be a sheep and only use a node from a single centralised source.. where the proposals for upgrades are moderated to the extreme and idea's closed within 24 hours if it does not fit the blockstream roadmap..

it seems many have not understood the real underlying problem or the true meaning of decentralisation

do some maths
if fee was just 1sat a byte.. then with the smallest tx being over 100bytes.. means 100 sat minimum

now work out what 100sats are if btc was $100k..

hint: far more than 10cents

core is not the core.

if you start thinking core is the single point of decision then you have already given in to centralisation...... think long and hard about the statement i just said and dont automatically go to defense mode.

but the rest of your post just goes to show most centralists only care about free coins and not decentralisation, not consensus and not bitcoin upgrades, its all about increasing future fiat profit not bitcoins longevity/ethos

major services... im guessing by reading your first statement where you are practically saying that merchants dont matter in this economy (facepalm) that the services you speak of are just the silly exchanges that accept any crap coin..

as i said unless there is an actual PURPOSE of a coin (need to have it to buy something) then all that is left is the speculative bubble market of exchanges, thus no different then clams or other altcoin of no purpose than to speculate

so merchants are relevant if its to be considered a proper REAL WORLD REAL USAGE currency rather than just a speculative exchange investment in the bubble market

miners will mine whatever makes them profit.
exchanges will accept pretty much any coin these days so they dont care

but what really makes a coin useful, popular and ultimately the main coin is what the coin that merchants accept.. meaning coinbase /bitpay due to the merchant shopping cart services they offer. ill emphasise merchant tools part of coinbase, not the exchange part

core will and are doing everything they can to ensure x2 is an altcoin and not a core upgrade proposal.

personally i would have been happy with the x2 IF it was allowed as a bitcoin upgrade. but knowing its just a bait and switch plan of the bscartel just to get segwit and then backtrack out of x2 like they did last year and year before by only wanting anything more than a 1mb base block to be an altcoin..

anyway x2 will 100% be an alt.. and knowing that coinbase and bitpay are bscartel controlled, this whole x2 drama is just an over hyped clams3.0 scenario