Y'know, taking a step back from it all, these XT guys are real pushy characters. Kinda seems like they'll offer you anything really, it's just gotta be using their super-free alt-client
Where'd they train you all up, the Jehovah's Witnesses? Scientology?
Carlton Banks, I was expecting more from you. You even said that I was being reasonable in our previous discussion. There is no need for ad hominem. Most of us are now at least agreeing on increasing the block size, which is a great relieve to me. I still prefer BIP101 though, BIP100 is an acceptable compromise however. I would have preferred it if there was no 32meg limit in BIP100, since in a few years we will have to go through all of this again, and consensus will most likely be even more difficult to reach in the future, which might even cause a split. Just letting the miners decide is fine with me since they are incentivized to do what is best for Bitcoin after all. I can trust proof of work more then any developer team lol.
on-topic, there are a large number of people still promoting this alt-client dev team takeover, and you want to invoke the moral high ground against me on the basis of the blocksize debate?
I am not sure how I am invoking any moral high ground. I do not think I am incorrect that you were using ad hominem, which is a logical fallacy and has nothing to do with morals. However I do still prefer BIP101 and I do not think that reaching 75% consensus should be considered an alt-client dev team take over. But in the interests of compromise I would support BIP100 instead, with some reservations I have already pointed out. We might end up on the same side of the fork after all Carlton! Huzzah!
cheerful avoidance of a direct accusation? check
attempt to establish the blocksize debate as the contentious issue? check (twice you've pulled the same trick, is it not just a massively cheap move to do it a second time?)
I invite those reading this to take this is they find it
I have a background in philosophy so I do take such an accusation seriously. I was specifically referring to you saying this:
"Y'know, taking a step back from it all, these XT guys are real pushy characters. Kinda seems like they'll offer you anything really, it's just gotta be using their super-free alt-client. Where'd they train you all up, the Jehovah's Witnesses? Scientology?"
So you are accusing me of taking the moral high ground, because of what I said in response to this quote. This quote is ad hominem because you are not making an argument and you are just attacking the people that are making the argument instead. Because I said this you are now saying that I am avoiding a direct accusation, and taking the moral high ground? Since I have done no such thing, I do not even use morals in argumentation, I use ethics and I have certainly not invoked them here. I challenge you to point out to me specifically where I invoke the moral high ground against you on the basis of the blocksize debate? I do not even understand what you are trying to do here? I thought we where being civil after that last discussion we had?
