"Bitcoin Classic" is a classic attempt at a hostile takeover

[CIYAM]

Again we have another "we must increase the block size ASAP" fork crap - under the most stupid name "Bitcoin Classic".

It's a "classic" alright - a "classic attempt to FUD people into letting a small bunch of wannabe Bitcoin overlords take over the project".

The blocks are not even nearly full most of the time (apart from attacks which are just spam being used to fill up the mempool for FUD reasons).

The reason that people don't use Bitcoin for normal txs is "why the hell would they?".

Even if a vendor were to offer a cheaper price for paying in BTC you still have to change your fiat into BTC to purchase from them (and then most likely BitPay or another provider is going to take at least 1% commission).

If you don't purchase your BTC via an exchange (and no average person is going to do that to just buy something) then most likely you are going to pay at least 5% commission - so if you are ending up with 6% commission - did you save anything from using a credit card?

Also you can't get a refund if you pay with BTC - so the masses are not screaming to pay with BTC at all (far from it - if it cannot be reversed then I suspect 99% of people would not want to use it as certainly every person I have spoken to does not like the idea).

Can we stop with the FUD and let the project just continue to improve the tech?

[CIYAM]

So - big block fans - where are the signatures of the clearly tens (or hundreds) of thousands of frustrated wannabe Bitcoin users that are only not using it because of the block size?

Of course there are none - the only people complaining about it are the payment processors hoping to get rich and those that are wanting to take control of the project.

It is good that Mike Hearn has left - but we still need Gavin to leave as well IMO (as he is not giving up trying to take over the project as is obvious from his quick change from XT to Classic).

[CIYAM]

Funniest extortion attempt ever? Not you too?!?

Extortion attempt?

Huh?

(exactly what I am trying to extort?)

[CIYAM]

Sorry. That's just what I call you.

I see - you just like to call people things (I believe there are names for people like you but I'll refrain from saying them).

How about you try and just stay on topic and stop with the snide remarks (or is that too much to ask)?

[Kprawn]

I am going to respond to one of the OP's post, because he has a excellent point and I agree with him 100% on this. I know he hates signature posters and I am most probably on his

shit list, but I am going to ask in any way. Has anyone scrutinized the new proposal to see if any strange code has been added, like they tried with the XT proposal. {I refer to the

IP Blocking & options for tx reversal and blacklisting of coins } I still think he {Gavin} just opted for the middle ground on this whole debate, because it was the most popular option

to get his foot in the door. Things will then evolve from there to work towards a so-called hostile takeover.  

[CIYAM]

I remember clearly the whole BIP 16 vs BIP 17 thing where Gavin attacked Luke-Jr with this topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=62037.0

This was the point that I lost respect for Gavin - attacking someone the way he did then just proved that he was not at all like Satoshi (show me any post where Satoshi behaved like that).

[forevernoob]

On-topic: There's no neutral position here. Replace-by-fee Bitcoin isn't Bitcoin, either. The whole world is about to change!

RBF is optional.
Block size is not.

[DooMAD]

Has anyone scrutinized the new proposal to see if any strange code has been added, like they tried with the XT proposal. {I refer to the

IP Blocking & options for tx reversal and blacklisting of coins }

How many more times?

Anyone find any hidden gems in the Classic code like "blacklisting"?

The code everyone was soiling themselves over last time is actually present in Bitcoin core's repository too, so any node could be running it right now regardless of the client they elect to use.  It's not "blacklisting" per se and it's definitely not unique to XT.  So yeah, you probably will find that code in Classic, because it's in Core too.

[CIYAM]

It isn't the code that is the issue - it is the hostile takeover that is.

Clearly Mike was not as good at politics as Gavin so he tried to stuff in other changes (especially after XT was DDoS attacked).

Gavin has cleverly now gone with something that only changes the one thing (but more importantly puts him back in charge - after they take over who knows what will happen).

[BlindMayorBitcorn]

On-topic: There's no neutral position here. Replace-by-fee Bitcoin isn't Bitcoin, either. The whole world is about to change!

RBF is optional.
Block size is not.

Optional in the sense that its very existence will change Bitcoin forever??

[shorena]

- -
On-topic: There's no neutral position here. Replace-by-fee Bitcoin isn't Bitcoin, either. The whole world is about to change!

In the light of a serious discussion, what exactly is not bitcoin about opt-in rbf?

[onemorexmr]

what is your problem with a bitcoin fork?
i think its the best way to decide blockchain related questions.

it may create a little confusion but that wont last long.

IMHO its the only way to decide such problems for once and forever without having FUDs later.

[CIYAM]

If Bitcoin Classic wins then Gavin is going to be the "benevolent dictator" (which I think has always been his desire).

Do you want him as the overlord?

I guess that is the question (personally I am happier with the Bitcoin Core team as it stands).

[shorena]

what is your problem with a bitcoin fork?
i think its the best way to decide blockchain related questions.

it may create a little confusion but that wont last long.

IMHO its the only way to decide such problems for once and forever without having FUDs later.

Both are forking anyway, thats hardly the point. Classic is going for a hardfork while core has a softfork ahead.

[onemorexmr]

If Bitcoin Classic wins then Gavin is going to be the "benevolent dictator" (which I think has always been his desire).

Do you want him as the overlord?

I guess that is the question (personally I am happier with the Bitcoin Core team as it stands).

in case classic classic wins and gavin would act as a benevolent dictator it would just lead to another fork which fixes it.

[CuntChocula]

If Bitcoin Classic wins then Gavin is going to be the "benevolent dictator" (which I think has always been his desire).

Do you want him as the overlord?

I guess that is the question (personally I am happier with the Bitcoin Core team as it stands).

Personally, I feel much safer at Blockstream's maternal bosom.  

[forevernoob]

On-topic: There's no neutral position here. Replace-by-fee Bitcoin isn't Bitcoin, either. The whole world is about to change!

RBF is optional.
Block size is not.

Optional in the sense that its very existence will change Bitcoin forever??

You mean Bitcoin Classics existence would change Bitcoin?
Like XT did?  

[CIYAM]

Personally, I feel much safer at Blockstream's maternal bosom.  

The core devs do not all work for Blockstream - perhaps you'd like to actually say the % of them that do?

[CuntChocula]

Personally, I feel much safer at Blockstream's maternal bosom.  

The core devs do not all work for Blockstream - perhaps you'd like to actually say the % of them that do?

Perhaps I'm misinformed. G.Maxwell is the CTO of __________?

[QuestionAuthority]

Wow, old time Bitcoin hardliners are waking up. Well, that took long enough.

I've been saying for about four years that the Bitcoin economy only exists to give miners someplace to spend their mined coins. When that stops there won't be any economy unless something drastic happens. Before the government crackdown people would buy btc to spend on illegal onion network contraband. Now that's over. Does anyone really think people are wasting time buying Bitcoin to transfer a few bucks overseas or buy a gallon of milk? Surely no one here is really that naive.