Segwit / Blockstream / G.Maxwell / Banking Cartels Supporters Fork Off Already

[kiklo]

As the Issues with BTC limitations,

ie: ONCHAIN TRANSACTIONS CAPACITY continues being ignore by the BTC Core Dev Team

They Continue pointing fingers and blaming others for their lack of achievements, and make false accusations,
and even claim making ASICS more energy efficient is an attack vector.
(How Stupid can someone be to think making a product more energy efficient is an attack vector.)
(1 word => DumbAss)
 
So enough is enough , If the Segwit Supporters believe in their code so much,

Hard Fork Segwit and lets move on.

Either Put up or Shut up, Hard Fork or STFU about the trying to give BTC to the Banking Cartels.

And if you seqwit supporters are afraid of Hard Forks, give up crypto all together, you are too timid for the virtual world.  


 

[iamnotback]

Don't speak such half-truths, lest you'll be accused of shilling for Litecoin.

[Quantus]

A shill telling another shill to dial it back some. HAHAHAHA

[iamnotback]

A shill telling another shill to dial it back some. HAHAHAHA

[kiklo]

A shill telling another shill to dial it back some. HAHAHAHA

So do you believe in Segwit enough to hard fork?

Or are you some hybrid rabbit/chicken creature?


 

[kiklo]

Don't speak such half-truths, lest you'll be accused of shilling for Litecoin.

It is amazing these guys point fingers and cry shill all day long, but can't get off their asses long enough in a year to either increase the blocksize or move to a faster block speed. BTC core has the Lamest Devs , I have ever seen.    


 

[Quantus]

Do you support spamming the network with fake transactions and empty blocks just so miners can gain a efficiency boost?

[kiklo]

Do you support spamming the network with fake transactions and empty blocks just so miners can gain a efficiency boost?

I support increasing the Transaction Capacity, and keeping the fees to something affordable for 3rd world countries.

You know , are they paying for the transactions or not. If they are payed for , who are you to call them spam.
Are you the BTC Spam checker?

And Yes , I am in favor of any and all ways to improve energy efficiently of the energy wasterful ASICS.
There are people that live near these ASICS warehouses that are seeing their electricity rates rise as a result.
So if being more efficient meant , that the poor people living near these warehouses electric rates don't keep rising , then hell yeah , I am in favor of it ,
and if you are a decent human being YOU WOULD BE TOO!

If you have a problem with empty blocks , Hard Fork BTC to where it has to include a minimum of 1000 transactions per block or be rejected.
See that solution , took me 2 seconds, where as BTC Core Devs , whine and have coded no real fixes.


 

[Quantus]

I did't call them spam they are fake they are generated at the time the blocks are created they did not propagate across the network they are made for the sole purpose to mine blocks faster thus fake transactions.
80 to 90 percent of the transactions on the network are fake or spam we don't need a larger block size. What we need is to fix transaction malleability. But we can't because your Chines overlords are preventing the network from upgrading so they can keep there 20-30 percent advantage and hold onto their mining monopoly.

Why would we fork off its our network Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin classic are a cancer in Bitcoins ass a cancer that needs to be cut out. You are part of that cancer. Your here to scare people and send money flowing out side of bitcoin into the alt-coin markets for your own profit that makes you a shill.  The fees are high not because we need more block space but because your friends over in China are pumping the network full of fake transactions and ignoring the real ones.

[kiklo]

I did't call them spam they are fake they are generated at the time the blocks are created they did not propagate across the network they are made for the sole purpose to mine blocks faster thus fake transactions.
80 to 90 percent of the transactions on the network are fake or spam we don't need a larger block size. What we need is to fix transaction malleability. But we can't because your Chines overlords are preventing the network from upgrading so they can keep there 20-30 percent advantage and hold onto their mining monopoly.

Why would we fork off its our network Bitcoin Unlimited, Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin classic are a cancer in Bitcoins ass a cancer that needs to be cut out. You are part of that cancer. Your here to scare people and send money flowing out side of bitcoin into the alt-coin markets for your own profit that makes you a shill.  The fees are high not because we need more block space but because your friends over in China are pumping the network full of fake transactions and ignoring the real ones.

Hmm,
Do you read what you write, because you just did call them fake or spam.

Hey Genius , if you really believe everyone else is the cancer, then a Hard Fork would cut us away from your beloved core.

There you go again , with the finger pointing at the Chinese, they are not the ones refusing to increase ONCHAIN Transaction Capacity.

IF China is that powerful and doing what you claim, then Hard Fork and change PoW to make their ASICS useless.

See no matter how you look at it , the core is a bunch of pussies that are too chicken shit to hard fork , but want to belly ache everyday.

Sick of their crybaby candy asses, Hard Fork or Shut up.

If Core can't fix their problems with a Hard Fork, then they need to get out of the way and let others take over, it is that simple.

 

[Quantus]

Thats just what you and your shill brethren want a hardfork that would sink Bitcoins market cap and bring on a new age of pump and dump alt coins so you can turn a profit. You make me sick. No... I feel sad for you.

[Velkro]

ie: ONCHAIN TRANSACTIONS CAPACITY continues being ignore by the BTC Core Dev Team

So what? Bitcoin works great, its most secure network in the world, only disadvantage is longer wait times. Compared to other problems that could arise from rising block size limit we are in great situation now .

[AngryDwarf]

I did't call them spam they are fake they are generated at the time the blocks are created they did not propagate across the network they are made for the sole purpose to mine blocks faster thus fake transactions.
80 to 90 percent of the transactions on the network are fake or spam we don't need a larger block size. What we need is to fix transaction malleability. But we can't because your Chines overlords are preventing the network from upgrading so they can keep there 20-30 percent advantage and hold onto their mining monopoly.

BitFury have these curious transactions too, so don't just blame the Chinese. One simple way to deal with them, if the blocks contain transactions timestamped with the same timestamp as the block timestamp, orphan them!

[kiklo]

Thats just what you and your shill brethren want a hardfork that would sink Bitcoins market cap and bring on a new age of pump and dump alt coins so you can turn a profit. You make me sick. No... I feel sad for you.

That's right stick your head in the ground, nothing is wrong with BTC.

Transactions are taking days for some people.
Many people in foreign countires can not afford the increasing transaction fees,

but hey no problem here , just shills.

Please Grow Up and act like an Adult.


 

[kiklo]

ie: ONCHAIN TRANSACTIONS CAPACITY continues being ignore by the BTC Core Dev Team

So what? Bitcoin works great, its most secure network in the world, only disadvantage is longer wait times. Compared to other problems that could arise from rising block size limit we are in great situation now .

Mail me some of what you are smoking?