Should we retaliate and spam the Bscash chain?

[Pidgeon]

With BTC under attack from Roger and his friends, do you think we should do the same?

The bullshitcash chain is pretty easy to spam especially since they claim they have low fees.
Check this out:
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transactions?s=size(desc)
1M transaction with 0 fees.

Should we help them reach a 1TB chain faster?

[1714031535]

1714031535

[HeRetiK]

No. Pettiness never helped anyone. BTC has enough problems of its own, let's focus on solving these first before waging a pointless "war".

And who knows, maybe there are lessons to be learned from BCH after all.

[Jet Cash]

I think we should let them pick up all the dust transactions, and let Bitcoin itself become an efficient store of wealth.

[blackcoiner]

Lets do it

[BrewMaster]

you can't spam bitcoin cash. not now anyways because the blocks are over 90% empty and that means you have to fill 90% of the empty blocks or in other words you have to spam 7 MB and 800-900 kB to fill each block and that is an impossible thing to do and keep up.

if some day bitcoin cash reaches a fuller block size, it will be spammed for sure. and easily by then. and that is when everything will shatter and fail with BCH since all their promises of low fees will go down the tube when the BCH mempool is filled with 100,000 transactions.

[taeewo]

Any thing is possible, if most people support it can be implemented..

[spazzdla]

Sub 30 posts asking for this.. It is almost like someone or group is trying to Pit BTC against BCH to stop a movement that was once laughed at but now is starting to look unstoppable.  

BTC will not die
BCH will not die

Consensus algos are coming for banks and govs alike the freedom of humanity is on the horizon.  Let us hope we get there.

[james282]

I've been combing the internet all day for this, so finding this topic is useful to me.

Is there evidence that Roger Ver and the people at bitcoin.com are spamming the BTC network? Roger has always denied his involvement of course. I'm just curious if there is actually evidence of this.

[EpicFail]

We need datapoints to see how the network would degrade when the blocks are consistently way over 1MB. If the impact is minor, then who knows some level of safe block size increase could also be incorporated into core.

I am fine with the idea of using BCH as a guinea pig for big block stress testing.

[joecooin]

Stupid idea really.

[HasHe]

We need not have to spam BCH network.But BCH network would get destroyed by itself very soon.So,it would be better for us to do something for the progress of bitcoin as we are productive people and not spammers like the BCH supporters.Only seven or ten transactions are processed in each block and for that,they said that transaction is fast in BCH and transaction fee is low.In  case,if transaction limit increases high,then it would not be able to handle that huge number of transactions unlike bitcoin and it may soon come to an end.