the only bloatcoiner smart enough to see this clearly is Mike Hearn, and that is exactly why he has put in the effort to make XT. Classic controlled demolition.
Excellent (and blessedly succinct) argument by analogy. "Hostile/malicious fork" descriptive power just doesn't have the same je ne sais quoi as "controlled demolition."
Does not convince many. Not here and not there.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1144606.60Bitcoin is explicitly non-democratic. Populism has no power here.
Yes, the populism of the 1MBers has no power, neither in the threads of the elite nor anywhere else. That's why the limit will be raised within the next 12 month.
The "populism of the 1MBers" is not your concern.
Your concern is the multi-year duration and multi-billion-dollar magnitude of Bitcoin's current economic majority.
Are you going to be the first brave fellow to defect from that imposing majority by accepting Gavin-tainted XTcoins? No? Then you are just a poser.
In the remote possiblity XT becomes a matter of more importance than the hype, mirth, and scorn it generates at present, MPex and other 1MBer Elder Whales are prepared to use substantial (possibly exhaustive) portions of their extraordinarily massive war chests to repel 8MBer attacks. To them, this is Holy War, with barbarian Gavinista hordes clamouring for a Free Shit Junta at the gates of their bespoke civilization. They are more of a mood to impale heads atop spikes than reward with compromise Hearn's attacks on decentralization, Tor, and the consensus process.
Are you still sure you want to risk your tiny stash playing Hard Fork Poker with such ultra-high-rollers?
Before you answer, please take into account that nodes by default prioritize tx moving older coins, and the Royalty of La Serenissima possesses, in great quantities, very old coins.
What will you do when the limit isn't raised within the next 12 months? Continue to cry wolf? Self harm? Or admit being wrong?
You know iCE, I also am concerned by the idea of a hostile fork, but reading your propaganda it just dawned on me that the only hostilities are coming from people like you. Everyone of any worth agrees we need to increase the block size, it's just there is a hostile minority who feel they are in power who are wanting to pick a fight.
Accommodating bigger blocks over a 12 month period given Bitcoin's exponential growth is not a hostile act, it's not rushing in a controversial change, it's a practical prudent approach.
You are part of the minority who are making it controversial and calling it hostile. I just don't see why you're opposed to letting Bitcoin grow free of manipulation and control.
