atleast james lopp is speaking the truth
BTC = bitcoin CORE
No. James Lopp would NEVER say "BTC = Bitcoin Core". You are forcing that to us again. Hahaha.
Bitcoin is now Bitcoin instead of the coin that you like calling "Bitcoin Core" because Bitcoin Core is Bitcoin Core, BTCC.
There is a new fork from the original Bitcoin Cash chain called Bitcoin Clashic. The developers are calling it Bitcoin Core and has Roger Ver to thank for giving them the free publicity.
https://thebitcoincore.org/![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FDeUFU2TXcAAWYKG.jpg&t=665&c=EUfc4QiNKZ97lg)
now anyone that says 'no its just bitcoin' is under the same hypocrisy of cash
NO ONE owns "bitcoin" brand
Yes no one. You are in your rights to call your coin as the "real Bitcoin". But good luck in trying to convince the whole community.
if you argue that bitcoin.com says bitcoin cash is doing something. atleast dont be hypocritical and instead realise that bitcoin.org is doing the same thing
Roger owns bitcoin.com. He is also saying that "Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin". Bitcoin and bitcoin.org was already there before Roger Ver started manipulating everyone.
you cant pretend bitcoin cant be owned when arguing the cash drama. but then say bitcoin can be owned when defending the core drama
What drama? Bitcoin is Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin Cash, an altcoin and Bitcoin Core is Bitcoin Core, a fork of the original BCH chain, Bitcoin Clashic. Simple. There is no drama if each coin knows its place.
just accept the reality that the non-consensus bilateral split occured on august 1st. which is something provable in the blockchain of both networks. and provable in code. thus undeniable.
accept it occured. accept both networks went in different directions and get over it.
How can you make the people accept a lie?
NO ONE SHOULD OWN "BITCOIN"
then it will become easier to then start the real process of trying to get back to the ethos of what was once bitcoin:
core to never again do a mandatory bilateral split to gain power,
core to never rekt any node that wants to use consensus
core to treat other node implementations that want to remain on the network with respect on an equal level playfield of consensus
Stop repeating yourself. You are starting to sound like Roger Ver. Haha.
Are you Roger Ver?
then and only then can the decentralsied ethos be truly discussed as a feature
yes other node devs might propose features the COMMUNITY dont desire.
yes other nodes might not get 95% COMMUNITY agreement.
and dare i say it
yes core devs might propose features the COMMUNITY dont desire.
yes core nodes might not get 95% COMMUNITY agreement.
but thats where consensus comes in. the community discuss an overal compromise that benefits the majority as a whole.. no sides. no war. just a compromise and agreement.
But someone did a hard fork because he wanted an 8mb block size. Was that a compromise?
but never should core do a mandatory consensus bypass bilateral split to turn their 35% into 100% to take power
and never should core do a mandatory consensus bypass bilateral split to turn others 65% into 0% to remain in power
But the community, merchants and exchanges have spoken and the miners followed.