Analysis and list of top big blocks shills (XT #REKT ignorers)

[sgbett]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

[iCEBREAKER]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The block size is still 1MB, and those in favor of changing cannot agree when to raise it, nor by how much, nor by what formula future increases should be governed.

You are still soaking in glorious gridlock despite all the sound and fury, and I am loving every second of your agitation.   

[Zarathustra]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).

[hdbuck]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).

Aww, so gullible.

[iCEBREAKER]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).

Aww, so gullible.

The Gavinistas think they're the only ones capable of manipulating public opinion via false narrative headfakes.

It's like Charlie Brown and the football.  Lucy outwits him.  Every.  Single.  Time.

[BitUsher]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists, I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

[worhiper_-_]

After the failure of XT Gavin moved to "Bitcoin Classic" and he calls it the vision of Satoshi. 

https://bitcoinclassic.com/

"The data shows consensus amongst miners for an immediate 2 MB increase, and demand amongst users for 8 MB or more."

Are they wrong??

https://bitcoin.consider.it/
https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cg9Qo9Vl5PdJYD4EiHnIGMV3G48pWmcWI3NFoKKfIzU/edit#gid=0

Who has edit access to this google document?

[JorgeStolfi]

https://bitcoin.consider.it/
https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Cg9Qo9Vl5PdJYD4EiHnIGMV3G48pWmcWI3NFoKKfIzU/edit#gid=0

Who has edit access to this google document?

The Toomim brothers.

[iCEBREAKER]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

Here, I'll clarify.

2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro

Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum

Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition

BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack

BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition

BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club

Is that clear now?

[BitUsher]

Here, I'll clarify.

2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro

Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum

Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition

BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack

BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition

BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club

Is that clear now?

Excellent, I welcome a diversity of ideas(your sarcasm doesn't escape me , but the more BIP's, involvement , and testing the better IMHO). What I find troubling about Bitcoin Classic thus far is it appears more of a political wedge proposal instead of a technical one as people are voting on something without a BIP, whitepaper , or code available. What I like about it is there now is a competing implementation with some talented developers maintaining it which is great for our ecosystem. (BU and Libbitcoin need a lot of help, and XT has been deserted)

I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.

[iCEBREAKER]

What I find troubling about Bitcoin Classic thus far is it appears more of a political wedge proposal instead of a technical one as people are voting on something without a BIP, whitepaper , or code available. What I like about it is there now is a competing implementation with some talented developers maintaining it which is great for our ecosystem. (BU and Libbitcoin need a lot of help, and XT has been deserted)

I will withhold judgment of Bitcoin classic's merits till at least a whitepaper is released.

So long as Bitcoin isn't broken, there is no problem for the (increasingly abstruse) universe of Gavinista vanity forks to fix.

Bitcoin_Classic is vaporware, so people may project whatever properties they desire onto its nebulous cloud of anti-cyberpunk tropes.

That approach didn't work for Unlimiturd, and _Classic is likewise an imaginary solution in search of a problem.

[worhiper_-_]

BTW I made a "Bitcoin Classic" discussion topic.

[jonald_fyookball]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists, I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

don't know, but any raising of the limit is good.  The worst thing we can do IMO is just keep the limit at 1MB while transaction volume keeps growing.

[hdbuck]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists, I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

don't know, but any raising of the limit is good.  The worst thing we can do IMO is just keep the limit at 1MB while transaction volume keeps growing.

I understand it is hard for you brainwashed internet kids to wrap your buttheads around, still, Bitcoin is/would not be "broken" in any way.

You've just been lied to by the gavintonopoulos from the beginning

[BitUsher]

don't know, but any raising of the limit is good.  The worst thing we can do IMO is just keep the limit at 1MB while transaction volume keeps growing.

I believe the consensus around core is to increase capacity to ~1.75 MB with SegWit. So the context of analyzing this proposal should be in comparing 1.75 vs 2 or 3.5 bitcoin classic +segwit... but realistically we don't have much to discuss as nothing has been formally proposed... and we are all just speculating.

[Zarathustra]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).

Aww, so gullible.

It's the roadmap, signed by the members of the Politbüro.

[hdbuck]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The militant small block comedians already decided to raise the limit before the halving date, to 4 MB (to get 1.5 MB).

Aww, so gullible.

It's their roadmap, signed by the members of the Politbüro.

ftfy.

Besides you know there is actually more people outside the internet?

If bitcoin was to be highjacked by couple thousand redditards and governed by ~50 bloggers, it would not be bitcoin.

[hdbuck]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

Here, I'll clarify.

2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro

Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum

Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition

BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack

BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition

BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club

Is that clear now?

GPFBCBSOotMC FTW!

[Fatman3001]

Bitcoin classic = 2mb?  

Um OK, let's do it.

There still isn't clarity if this is a 2MB kick the can proposal, and 2MB immediate, and 4MB later proposal , or and 2MB immediate and doubling every 2 years BIP 101 style proposal. (We are also unaware of the specifics to the hardfork transition) Since the normal BIP process isn't being followed and no whitepaper exists I cannot give my opinion on Bitcoin Classic. I would suggest that I do find it backwards and disheartening that so many are ACk'ing a proposal that isn't even clarified formally in either a whitepaper, BIP, or code which should all come before people judge it, IMHO.

Voting for this at this moment appears to be more of a political anti-vote against core than any technical vote upon the merits of the proposal.

Here, I'll clarify.

2MB immediate + 4MB later then stop = Bitcoin Pro

Bitcoin Pro + double block limit every 2 years forever = Bitcoin Platinum

Platinum + 90% trigger = Bitcoin Tournament Edition

BTE - RBF + SegWit - CLTV = Bitcoin Coin of the Year Collectors Pack

BCotYCP - checkpoints + TOR blacklists = Bitcoin XT Klassic Limited Edition

BXTKLE + unlimited blocks right now + 42 million coin total emission - halvings = Gavinista Peoples' Front Bitcoin Christmas Bonus Special Offer of the Month Club

Is that clear now?

[sgbett]

"Furioser and furioser!" said Alice.

Fear does funny things to people.

Wasn't your precious XT fork supposed to happen today?

Or was that yesterday?

Either way, for all the sturm und drang last year the deadline turned out to be a titanic non-event.

Exactly as the small block militia told you it would be.

The block size is still 1MB, and those in favor of changing cannot agree when to raise it, nor by how much, nor by what formula future increases should be governed.

You are still soaking in glorious gridlock despite all the sound and fury, and I am loving every second of your agitation.   

We can't both be quite happy with how things are changing, because one of us keeps frantically trying to protect the status quo