We don't know, but (and I believe this to be the case) if the developers are not petulant children arguing on a forum such as this, then its likely that their discussion will revolve around finding the common ground in between opposing opinions. That would be a more interesting discussion to be having but all I see every day are polarised opinions (presented as fact). Exaggeration by both camps, hostility, refusal to move from entrenched positions and mischarecterisation of others views.
Maybe you're not looking hard enough?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uzwgs/scaling_bitcoin_2_in_just_5_days/You're fooling yourself if you expect productive development to be held "on a forum such as this"
I notice alot of people using this forum as a platform to berate it. I also notice that alot of people are using this forum as a platform to advertise alternative forums.
Kind of an inconsistency between what these two groups are saying and what they're doing: Why do they keep coming back here if bitcointalk.org is held in such contempt?
Meh, if only they would stick with their VERified Kingdom. There surely must be as much freedom as idiocy there.
Starting to be a bit bored with the rhetoric manoeuvres that implies exactly what they are imposing here with their "opinions stated as facts".
If you can call it opinions though.. Magic futuristic numbers and rainbow mass projections imho.
Clearly THE NETWORK has consensually rejected XT and BIP101.
At this point, I wonder what is the percentage of shills vs idiots amongst these forkers. (oh and yes that's an opinion, and a fact)
I post here because I think it is a good place to discuss bitcoin. On the whole I like the community. I don't subscribe to the belief that there is rampant censorship either here or on r/bitcoin. I think that all that commentary is cliched nonsense from people who think they are the first person to ever be butthurt on the internet. I don't think there is some grand conspiracy afoot. Though I do think that different people have different motives. I accept that a person's fundamental beliefs about what bitcoin is/should be may lead them to have different opinions about what is desirable in terms of protocol decisions, or development.
I'm not shill or an "idiot forker" I'm a bitcoin enthusiast who believes that bitcoin can revolutionise 'money' at its very core. I think that is desirable and so I think that anything that furthers that end is also desirable. I believe in the wisdom of the crowd vs governance. I am probably somewhat libertarian in my outlook. I tell you these things so you can know who I am and because I am not afraid of people knowing who I am even though they may try to use that against me.
I think the massive hypocrisy displayed by both 'sides' is embarrassing. Each accuses the other of objectionable conduct, seemingly oblivious that they themselves are doing the very same thing.
They are the petulant children I am referring to, and they are not 'this forum'. I stopped posting on this thread because I didn't like the place I was being taken. I've started posting again because after reflecting I think I can avoid making the same mistakes.
I think the truth will emerge, regardless of hyperbole from either side. I think the wisdom of the crowd will prevail. That does not mean I think the crowd will choose big blocks, it means that I think if bigger blocks are needed then I think that something will happen to ensure that bigger blocks happen. I think if they are not needed, it will be because something happened that obviated any need.
I'm really happy with the way things are going at the moment, despite what anyone else might think on the subject.
