Last I checked the ETH developers implemented a design to make this possible.
They gave us the means. They created the wallet for this project. They have pledged support to this project.
All you had to do was click "no" in your wallet. Then you were on ETC. You had to disagree with a change for technical reasons. It had nothing to do with your vote.
This is within the design created by the Ethereum project that forked away from the chain.
Yes but this thread is about the immutable chain which is ETC
Is this the kind of stupid you expect to build your community on?You might disagree with Vitalik about the way forward, but anyone with half a brain knows who made this thread and what it's for.
Vitaliks team wanted to take Ethereum in a different direction than you. They got the miners, users and exchanges to follow them. So you created an alt.
And you have accepted this. You don't call it Ethereum. You call it Ethereum Classic. All the exchanges use the abbreviation ETC for this new alt.
Eth from the original Ethereum team is still listed as ETH. Unless ETC is just a project meant to troll Ethereum I suggest that you clean up these distinctions so that users can make an informed decision between Ethereum and your Ethereum Alt. Like Expanse, Lisk and others have done.
Btw, why not sell your eth, move to Expanse or Lisk and boost those projects? At least they have a clear profile, active devs and some USPs.
It's amazing how much stupid I see coming from this thread.
Vitalik's team created ETC. They got the miners, users, and exchanges to follow them
against their will. They were given a "choice", not a choice. The process was not truly democratic. A pool voted against it and was forced to fork. The pools that voted for it had terrible turnout. Turnout that was so bad any true democratic process would have thrown out the vote and tried again. Is it not true that if I send 2 Ether to the "yes" wallet and 1 Ether to the "no" wallet that both would count? So, if I wanted to have a
thousandmillion votes I just needed to be the next Soros, right?
Is that a democratic process?
Is that consensus?
Does it even matter now? We've already heard from enough people to know that there are people
within the foundation that disagree with the fork and have committed to helping ETC.
Or are you willfully blind to the statements being made?
You say they had the miners. We're showing you they didn't with hashrate. We have new pools joining every day, and more miners joining as they find out about us.
You say they had the users. We're showing you they didn't with volume, price, tweets, threads, etc.
You say they had the exchanges. We're showing you they didn't by getting added to more exchanges and those exchanges issuing the tokens ETC holders are owed. Bitfinex and Shapeshift coming soon.
What more do you need to see there isn't a consensus here?
How about this thread on Steem?
https://steemit.com/ethereum/@pigeons/conversation-between-vitalik-and-exchangesYou've never had the support of the exchanges or the pools. They were forced.
http://www.coindesk.com/hard-fork-ethereum-dao/Did you really have the support of the miners? This article suggests you didn't.
F2pool said:
"We are as a matter of principle against unduly rushed or controversial hard forks irrespective of the team proposing and we will not run such code on production systems nor mine any block from that hard-fork. I believe this is universal and it could be applied to ethereum, too. I fail to see why we must take such a controversial and risky hard fork.
We are not willing to deploy this hard fork unless we have to."
Consensus? We have it. Do you?
Fitting.
https://twitter.com/SatoshiLite/status/757377362677764096No devs eh.
https://decentralize.today/a-tale-of-two-chains-3f6d58a9df4a#.x9jm54rrmhttps://twitter.com/gavofyork/status/757197495801880576This is why ETC exists.
https://twitter.com/Excellion/status/757006923057078272What's wrong with ETH.
https://twitter.com/ChandlerGuo/status/757191880740184064I guess the answer is yes.
I was open to finding a reason to accept Ethereum Classic as a legitimate alt.
Sadly, there is nothing here.
I will try to address some points though.
The choice given was fork or not. A majority of the aforementioned groups chose the proposed HF, including F2Pool. I guess they found that they had to, as they themselves suggested. I am sure there are people who disagree with how "democratic" it was, but the existence of Ethereum Classic shows that there was a choice. And, ironically, they're the ones who have decided not to respect this choice.
There was a hashrate spike yesterday when ETC was listed on polo, but it's declining now. At max I think it was still below 7%. And some of those were ETH miners trying to attack the network.
Yes, ETC is listed at polo and a couple of other places, but it is not listed as ETH. Therefore, you didn't get the exchanges with you.
Users.... well, If you retained any users this should show in price. Atm the price of ETC is 1/20 of ETH and rapidly declining.
I'm sure there is more I can poke a hole in, but if people don't see the big picture now, I doubt they ever will.
