Who have right and which is the best?

[blunderer]

Right. You can't even lie right, as your post history shows. Keep waiting, tossing in bed every night, thinking about your life of [failed] crime.
You'll live to regret it.
Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.

As a troll you have become rather boring (are you too tired to think up anything more original?).

It isn't your fault - they only pay you X amount to troll me and I am rather a pest when it comes to trolling aren't I?

Each post you make is yet another nail in the coffin of laughable lies and failed extortion attempts you've cobbled together for yourself.
And don't think that moving to some third-world shithole will save you from the long arm of the law.
Wait.
 

[CIYAM]

Each post you make is yet another nail in the coffin of laughable lies and failed extortion attempts you've cobbled together for yourself.
And don't think that moving to some third-world shithole will save you from the long arm of the law.
Wait.
 

Of course - I am waiting for you to send the troops to capture me and then take me to prison.

[blunderer]

Each post you make is yet another nail in the coffin of laughable lies and failed extortion attempts you've cobbled together for yourself.
And don't think that moving to some third-world shithole will save you from the long arm of the law.
Wait.
 

Of course - I am waiting for you to send the troops to capture me and then take me to prison.

Nah, we'll just call your wife. She'll take you in hand mighty quick, we've seen the power she wields over you here

*But, of course, you're not worried at all. It usually takes me about 20 posts to convey how little I care about a topic

[CIYAM]

Nah, we'll just call your wife. She'll take you in hand mighty quick, we've seen the power she wields over you here

You seriously are a stupid person - your repeating of the incident in the past is not gaining you any respect (it only makes you look stupider and stupider).

You made your threat to sue me but it seems clearly you aren't going to go through with that so now you are trying to rewind and bring up earlier things.

Why don't you "grow a pair"?

[blunderer]

... You made your threat to sue me but it seems clearly you aren't going to go through with that ...

Wishful thinking

... That's right, wait for it. And don't bother pretending that you're not worried -- you are. As this thread clearly shows.
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine...
Wait for it.

... Each post you make is yet another nail in the coffin of laughable lies and failed extortion attempts you've cobbled together for yourself.
And don't think that moving to some third-world shithole will save you from the long arm of the law.
Wait.
 

Go on, post again about how you're totally not scairt shitless

[cjmoles]

Right. You can't even lie right, as your post history shows. Keep waiting, tossing in bed every night, thinking about your life of [failed] crime.
You'll live to regret it.
Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life.

As a troll you have become rather boring (are you too tired to think up anything more original?).

It isn't your fault - they only pay you X amount to troll me and I am rather a pest when it comes to trolling aren't I?

Each post you make is yet another nail in the coffin of laughable lies and failed extortion attempts you've cobbled together for yourself.
And don't think that moving to some third-world shithole will save you from the long arm of the law.
Wait.
 

Are there really shills who get paid to troll other members on this site or is that just some sort of thing people say...? Or, is trolling some sort of strange practice to derail a thread topic....a variety of red herring?  I don't know....but it only demonstrates the problems outlined in the topic of this thread.  Will there ever be a reasonable hope that a consensus would be reached or should the community settle for a less democratic structure?

[CIYAM]

... You made your threat to sue me but it seems clearly you aren't going to go through with that ...

Wishful thinking

Okay boastful troll - your threat to sue me has been noted.

Once you have failed will you admit you are a troll or what?

[blunderer]

...  Will there ever be a reasonable hope that a consensus would be reached or should the community settle for a less democratic structure?

Because Democracy is not based on consensus. If it was, a single nay would stop every advance in its tracks, and Democracy would have been stillborn.

@CIYAM: Good things take time. Each post you make is another nail etc., etc. Stop turning every thread into some quarrel about yourself. Your appearance in any thread is as welcome as Typhoid Mary. Srsly, bro.
VVV

[CIYAM]

Are there really shills who get paid to troll other members on this site or is that just some sort of thing people say...?

Well - why would people that don't even know me get into vitriolic attacks on me in such a topic if they were not being paid for it (especially when we are talking about new accounts that shouldn't even know about things from 6-12 months ago which somehow they do).

[cjmoles]

...  Will there ever be a reasonable hope that a consensus would be reached or should the community settle for a less democratic structure?

Because Democracy is not based on consensus. If it was, a single nay would stop every advance in its tracks, and Democracy would have been stillborn.

Well, true to some degree.  Democracy was based on a 'general' consensus....a utilitarian approach to governance.  Unanimity doesn't come into play in systems that are purely communal....but what is best for the masses takes precedence over whats good for the few (elite).

[CIYAM]

Well, true to some degree.  Democracy was based on a 'general' consensus....a utilitarian approach to governance.  Unanimity doesn't come into play in systems that are purely communal....but what is best for the masses takes precedence over whats best for the few (elite).

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

[blunderer]

...  Will there ever be a reasonable hope that a consensus would be reached or should the community settle for a less democratic structure?

Because Democracy is not based on consensus. If it was, a single nay would stop every advance in its tracks, and Democracy would have been stillborn.

Well, true to some degree.  Democracy was based on a 'general' consensus....a utilitarian approach to governance.  Unanimity doesn't come into play in systems that are purely communal....but what is best for the masses takes precedence over whats best for the few (elite).

Unity becomes exponentially more difficult to achieve as numbers grow. Two coin tosses have a 50% chance to both land on the same side (heads or tails ; agreeing, consensus). Three coins 25%, four coins 12.5% etc., etc.
This, of course, is just an illustration, random tosses, coins have no "enlightened self-interest" to land on heads or tails, and consensus will be more likely to happen if people voted against, let's say, replacing our atmosphere with hydrogen cyanide, for instance. But you know that wouldn't be true consensus either, because nature of crowds, because suicides, because watch the world burn.

So trade-off: higher % majority = more stagnant system {conservative], lower % = more dynamic [revolutionary].

[cjmoles]

Well, true to some degree.  Democracy was based on a 'general' consensus....a utilitarian approach to governance.  Unanimity doesn't come into play in systems that are purely communal....but what is best for the masses takes precedence over whats best for the few (elite).

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

That's my point...Back in the day when everybody had the opportunity to mine it was an even playing field and that was important, but things have evolved.  Now, we have to reconsider things rather than hold on to the original model that has obviously went into a different direction than was originally anticipated.  Right?

[blunderer]

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

You're confusing how bitcoin protocol works (math) with who decides how it changes over time (politics, or you wouldn't be here).

Edit: What's more, we don't have a clear definition of terms here: what is "consensus"? It's been defined as anything from < 50% to 100%, but of what?
Bitcoin Wiki introduces the term "economic majority," but it's a junk term. People with fiat are the true economic majority.
So consensus of what? Miners [hashpower]? Holders of BTC [no mechanism to vote].
Holders of fiat [they're the ones who actually *BUY* coins]?
Number of nodes [irrelevant because trivially cheap to rig]?

[cjmoles]

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

You're confusing how bitcoin protocol works (math) with who decides how it changes over time (politics, or you wouldn't be here).

Very true...Trying to keep in the spirit of the original posters concern.  The OP was trying to figure out why there is so much debate and conflict between those who hold the keys to the project.  And, much of that conflict is based on ideology....but there's also a miner vs. adopter (consumer/user) aspect to the whole debate.  Right?

EDIT: I haven't even opened my Core wallet in weeks because I don't want to have to wait for it to synchronize....I'm just an average user so where is my motivation to maintain a full node to support the network?  I mean why?  Is that a valid question?

[blunderer]

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

You're confusing how bitcoin protocol works (math) with who decides how it changes over time (politics, or you wouldn't be here).

Very true...Trying to keep in the spirit of the original posters concern.  The OP was trying to figure out why there is so much debate and conflict between those who hold the keys to the project.  And, much of that conflict is based on ideology....but there's also a miner vs. adopter (consumer/user) aspect to the whole debate.  Right?  

Right. Bitcoin is [implicitly] dependent on miners' interests coinciding with those of the hodlers. By implicitly I mean the vulgar sense of the word, as in "implied but not directly stated." There are other mechanisms, like nodes, that are somehow meant to mediate this, though, like yourself, I'm at a loss as to how (see my post above).
Assuming that the interests of miners would align with those of the holders is valid only if no "cashing out" -- if miners were forced to keep their money as BTC rather than sell those BTC for USD. If the problem with this is unclear, I could expand, but am slow typer

@CIYAM below: If you have nothing but your paranoiac musings & baseless accusations to contribute, kindly stop shitting up this thread. ty.
VV

[CIYAM]

The OP was trying to figure out why there is so much debate and conflict between those who hold the keys to the project.  And, much of that conflict is based on ideology....but there's also a miner vs. adopter (consumer/user) aspect to the whole debate.  Right?  

It isn't really so hard to understand - we are talking about billions of dollars - that tends to make it easy for people to do anything (such as post rubbish at me like has been happening) for money.

This topic is just another excuse for those that are trying to get rid of the core devs to further their cause (and I would be pretty certain that is exactly why this topic was created in the first place).

[cjmoles]

Bitcoin is not about politics so why bring that into things?

(it's about a consensus algorithm)

You're confusing how bitcoin protocol works (math) with who decides how it changes over time (politics, or you wouldn't be here).

Very true...Trying to keep in the spirit of the original posters concern.  The OP was trying to figure out why there is so much debate and conflict between those who hold the keys to the project.  And, much of that conflict is based on ideology....but there's also a miner vs. adopter (consumer/user) aspect to the whole debate.  Right? 

Right. Bitcoin is [implicitly] dependent on miners' interests coinciding with those of the hodlers. By implicitly I mean the vulgar sense of the word, as in "implied but not directly stated." There are other mechanisms, like nodes, that are somehow meant to mediate this, though, like yourself, I'm at a loss to how (see my post above).
Assuming that the interests of miners would align with those of the holders is valid only if no "cashing out" -- if miners were forced to keep their money as BTC rather than sell those BTC for USD. If the problem with this is unclear, I could expand, but am slow typer

Yes...I just edited my post above in anticipation of the response but I'll put it here to keep things in context because you seem to type faster than I can think....LOL

I haven't even opened my Core wallet in weeks because I don't want to have to wait for it to synchronize....I'm just an average user so where is my motivation to maintain a full node to support the network?  I mean why?  Is that a valid question?  The less of an incentive it becomes to maintain a full node, the more control the miners consolidate.  I don't believe that was an intended outcome of the project....so things have changed from the original vision....the math needs to be re-thought in order to put the project back on track with the original vision....that's all.

[CIYAM]

I see - so you are another paid shill.

How surprising.

[cjmoles]

I see - so you are another paid shill.

How surprising.

No...I do my part to support the network.  I'm just saying that while everybody is pointing fingers and arguing about "degree's" of change rather than focusing on change in general that there are other technologies that have learned from the bitcoin experiment which are posed to fulfill the needs of the consumer, rather than the greed of the miners.  I mean, R3CEV has invested more on research than the entire marketcap of Bitcoin.  And Ethereum has capabilities that far surpass Bitcoin....are we going to let an Alt win, even though we have all the brains on our team?