BItcoin Core, Bitcoin Clasic, Bitcoin XT
Topic: Bitcoin Classic Roadmap annonced - page 2. (Read 2642 times)
this is just altcoin ?
BItcoin Core, Bitcoin Clasic, Bitcoin XT
BItcoin Core, Bitcoin Clasic, Bitcoin XT
Boy, that's a toughie. I'll let you know when it comes to me.
What I find very, very, very exciting about this new coin is that you can mine Bitcoin blocks with it. Surely this is a world first? Maybe it should be moved from the altcoin section now this important news has been uncovered?
Interesting. I hadn't noticed any of this. In which discussion section do you think this might be more suitable?
What I find very, very, very exciting about this new coin is that you can mine Bitcoin blocks with it. Surely this is a world first? Maybe it should be moved from the altcoin section now this important news has been uncovered?
Don't mind Adam. He seems to have just become politically active. I think it's a phase.
PS. OP can you please run some spell-check once in a while. This is embarrassing.
PS. OP can you please run some spell-check once in a while. This is embarrassing.
i can't fucking believe it.
HELLO altcoins
have you heard about bitcoin, and the war going on with classic vs core??? O_o?
HELLO altcoins
have you heard about bitcoin, and the war going on with classic vs core??? O_o?
Yes, we are watching.
i can't fucking believe it.
HELLO altcoins
have you heard about bitcoin, and the war going on with classic vs core??? O_o?
HELLO altcoins
have you heard about bitcoin, and the war going on with classic vs core??? O_o?
I still don't see why they aren't moved to the vastly better suited alternative clients subforum. Classic, XT and Unlimited are, after all, clients, not altcoins (at the risk of further discourse).
This was discussed in the past. This is not the right place do discuss this.these dates are goals not deadlines.
Yet Classic supporters complained about the 'lack of dates' on the Core Roadmap. So any dates more specific than q1, q2, q3, and q4? Those are pretty vague and they encompass several months. How about actual months specified like Bitcoin Core did with their roadmap (because this is pretty clear to be fighting back against the Core roadmap).
And how about making the roadmap more specific than just the "2016 roadmap"? A lot of things will happen in 2016, but this discusses specifically just scalability.
And how about making the roadmap more specific than just the "2016 roadmap"? A lot of things will happen in 2016, but this discusses specifically just scalability.
these dates are goals not deadlines.
So any dates more specific than q1, q2, q3, and q4? Those are pretty vague and they encompass several months. How about actual months specified like Bitcoin Core did with their roadmap (because this is pretty clear to be fighting back against the Core roadmap).
And how about making the roadmap more specific than just the "2016 roadmap"? A lot of things will happen in 2016, but this discusses specifically just scalability.
And how about making the roadmap more specific than just the "2016 roadmap"? A lot of things will happen in 2016, but this discusses specifically just scalability.
Nope. This board is just right.
Have you not noticed that XT/Classic/BU threads get moved somewhere? I still don't see why they aren't moved to the vastly better suited alternative clients subforum. Classic, XT and Unlimited are, after all, clients, not altcoins (at the risk of further discourse).
This discussion is the single most relevant discussion in bitcoinland ATM, let's keep it on the main board....
Nope. This board is just right.
Have you not noticed that XT/Classic/BU threads get moved somewhere? I still don't see why they aren't moved to the vastly better suited alternative clients subforum. Classic, XT and Unlimited are, after all, clients, not altcoins (at the risk of further discourse).
with apologies to Chris Rea
The Roadmap to Hell
And common sense is ringing out the bells
This ain't no technological breakdown
Oh no, this is the roadmap to Hell
And all the roads jam up with credit
And there's nothing you can do
It's all just bits of paper
Flying away from you
Oh look out world
Take a good look what comes down here
You must learn this lesson fast and learn it well
This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway
Oh no, this is the roadmap, said this is the roadmap
This is the roadmap to Hell
The Roadmap to Hell
And common sense is ringing out the bells
This ain't no technological breakdown
Oh no, this is the roadmap to Hell
And all the roads jam up with credit
And there's nothing you can do
It's all just bits of paper
Flying away from you
Oh look out world
Take a good look what comes down here
You must learn this lesson fast and learn it well
This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway
Oh no, this is the roadmap, said this is the roadmap
This is the roadmap to Hell
That's not ad-hominem, that's simple logic.
No. Just minutes ago you tried to justify presence of anti-"altcoin" topics in Bitcoin Discussion board while removing pro-"altcoin" topics.
That's certainly not what I said. I've explained the reasoning. A lot of people dislike Classic, ergo a 'positive thread/post' will attract a lot of attention and reports.Now you're saying you don't know why they're allowed. F**king please... You know exactly why, so do I and so everyone else who's active on the forum.
You certainly do not know how the 'staff group' functions, nor does me being a staff member imply that I know why every single thread, that is not part of my 'jurisdiction', is located at a certain section.And yes, I did report one of such threads. Can you guess what happened?
Sometimes reports are not justified. This is becoming off-topic and we should not continue this further here (PM for additional questions/new thread). If you have a complaint/suggestion/opinion regarding the forums rules, then you're free to make a thread about it in meta.peter todd thinks there somthing wrong with everything, segwit included.
You can't deny that his input is very valuable. It is not easy to create a proper implementation of dynamic blocks. Additionally we really don't have adequate data on them (I think; maybe I've missed something). Q3/Q4 seems too quick to push such a radical change. 
Schoolboy mistake. You, as a staff member, just openly admitted this forum is being censored.
If Classic is an altcoin, then it is an altcoin in both cases (positive or negative), therefore both kinds of threads should be moved or should stay.
So are you shilling openly now, or still pretending to be neutral and open-minded?
Here we go again, ad hominem as always. I don't move these threads, nor do I make the rules (nor does my opinion matter on whether Classic is an altcoin or not). I don't have an idea as to why any kind of Classic threads are left in B. Discussion. Maybe nobody bothered to report them. If you feel like they should be moved, then report them yourself. I only know of one that is there right now though.If Classic is an altcoin, then it is an altcoin in both cases (positive or negative), therefore both kinds of threads should be moved or should stay.
So are you shilling openly now, or still pretending to be neutral and open-minded?
That's not ad-hominem, that's simple logic. Just minutes ago you tried to justify presence of anti-"altcoin" topics in Bitcoin Discussion board while removing pro-"altcoin" topics. Now you're saying you don't know why they're allowed. F**king please... You know exactly why, so do I and so everyone else who's active on the forum.
And yes, I did report one of such threads. Can you guess what happened?
peter todd thinks there somthing wrong with everything, segwit included.
Schoolboy mistake. You, as a staff member, just openly admitted this forum is being censored.
If Classic is an altcoin, then it is an altcoin in both cases (positive or negative), therefore both kinds of threads should be moved or should stay.
So are you shilling openly now, or still pretending to be neutral and open-minded?
Here we go again, ad hominem as always. I don't move these threads, nor do I make the rules (nor does my opinion matter on whether Classic is an altcoin or not). I don't have an idea as to why any kind of Classic threads are left in B. Discussion. Maybe nobody bothered to report them. If you feel like they should be moved, then report them yourself. I only know of one that is there right now though. The thought behind that statement is that a 'positive If Classic is an altcoin, then it is an altcoin in both cases (positive or negative), therefore both kinds of threads should be moved or should stay.
So are you shilling openly now, or still pretending to be neutral and open-minded?
I've stumbled upon something interesting: How a floating blocksize limit inevitably leads towards centralization.
Nah, I've noticed plenty of "...Classic Rekt" etc hanging on this board without being moved anywhere.
Those are not exactly supportive of an Schoolboy mistake. You, as a staff member, just openly admitted this forum is being censored.
If Classic is an altcoin, then it is an altcoin in both cases (positive or negative), therefore both kinds of threads should be moved or should stay.
So are you shilling openly now, or still pretending to be neutral and open-minded?
sharing is caring.
Claiming that you've developed something that you 'copy-pasted' is something else entirely. seems to me like Classic gives credit where credit is due.
if there's anything else core would like to contribute, that would be gr8.
Jump to: