Topic: if Bitcoin HF, it will become "uninteresting" to Greg Maxwell (Read 1611 times)

Hahahaha! Funny. But what if it was all Andreas Antonopolous controlling both accounts and arguing with himself because he was bored.

The idea of Gmaxwell and Roger Ver posting under another username and ended up arguing with each other may have some cosmic interference there. They are made to fight each other.

*whistles in the wind* /giggles 

lol
you will soon learn im in my own army of self opinion. i am not here to kiss ass or make friends. i will continue to just talk frank about what is actually happening. i have corrected people on both sides of the fense. but it becomes apparent that the core fanbase has many scripts and little research that it appears im just 'attacking' blockstream fan-boys. simply because their sales pitches and scripts are so blindingly obvious of having faults in what they say

 i want dynamics and a network of diverse nodes working independantly using consensus to find some mutual agreement on a single network. i care more about the combination of atleast a dozen differing diverse codebases than any single one.

this is where the blockstream army have failed to pigeon hole me into any non-core group with every rekt campaign they have tried. because i belong to none of them.

i would infact be in favour of core if they got rid of the corporate puppet masters of blockstream pulling their strings. but core would need to actually act independent and think about the bitcoin network and not some corporate agenda to repay DCG millions.

but keep up with the insults, i do love the sound of whistles in the wind

Says franky1 of the Ver/Wu shill army.

core have about a dozen paid devs and 100 unpaid spell checker interns hoping to get a blockstream contract if they remain loyal

Jihan Wu Zhou Tong Sum Yung Guy


Is anyone else tired of getting screwed over by Asian teen boys?

If Bitcoin become uninteresting to Greg Maxwell, there are 99 other devs, am I right? So everything is going to be ok.

2013 levelDB bug(hours of orphans and stalling of chain growth) <- debunks cores perfect record
vs
some bu nodes went offline but the network continued
..
is core perfect? nope: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues

Roger Ver is using DASH to pump it as a "see, if you dont go BU, shitcoins will take over", sad to see how people are falling into the trap by buying that coin. Enjoy the pump while it lasts.

Meanwhile, actual experts are exposing BUgcoin for what it is:



And the market is already reacting towards Jihan's statefunded mining monopoly supporting BUGcoin:



Jihan cries on twitter about how "markets are unfair", gets ridiculuded by actual legends in the field:



It's ironic how the 2 biggest idiots in bitcoin have the most hashrate and the most money. Soon they'll be bankrupt tho.

Roger?

Gmax? is that you?

You know what I find uninteresting? BTU shills... You and franky1 should create some new accounts to at least give the appearance of non-shill support for BTU.

Step your game up!

Really? Then you of course will not mind providing a link to him stating such.

The same thoughts here. I believe the whales are hedging their bets on Ethereum, Dash, ZEC and XMR which are the biggest movers. Maybe this issue will finally make me invest in my first altcoin. I have been looking at ETC for some time now.

Could this be a planned effort to divide the community so that some altcoin conquers? Have we been tricked?

you need to learn the difference between the umbrella term HF. and then the subcategories below it.

contentious is where its not consensual.. and instead either controversial or bilateral split.


 then you see that with BU wanting hard CONSENSUS and not CONTENTIOUS...where by going consensus BEATS the corporate cartel of treating BU as the altcoin.
https://www.scribd.com/document/342194766/Hardfork-Statement-3-17-11-00am

because the corporate cartel said they would name it BTU if a CONTENTIOUS fork occurred.

which would happen only by core triggering it. because non-core implementations dont have code to do such a split. and for 2+ years of running on the main net, showed no intent to either. even now. now deadlines, no threats, no ban hammer. just plodding along letting the network decide for themselves.

and thats what core fear the most. that CONSENSUS will vote against core and for the non-core divers mutliple implementations that just want the raising of the main base block.
losing core its agenda to have control at the top of a TIER network .. and they will refuse to just be part of a PEER network


P.S
bitfinex also believe if CORE become the minority they will call core BCC. if BU become the minority they will call BU BCU
so its not a simple.. if there is a split BU is auto treated as the altcoin..

devil is in the details of the announcement... "contentious"
https://twitter.com/bitfinex/status/843226656940679170

https://img2.brain4.photobox.com/408112410aacfdbac4f290ff47f530f0f9d07a51494390cdaee751b0d8cf5dc1e4bc332f.jpg

I don't care if you believe me.  I said in the OP i don't know if its true.

Perhaps if Greg Maxwell really cares about Bitcoin and his core supporters, he will set the record
straight about what he would do in the event of a network split.   Since he frequently posts and is a
moderator of this forum, I assume he would see a thread with his name on it.

im laughing at the hypocrisy

1 minute : fear BU they want to split the network
2 minute : hurry and split the network because BU isnt going to

logic : NON-core implementations DONT want to split the network, they want consensus of level playing field PEER network
logic : core fear losing their TIER network and dont want to be on same level PEER network as other implementations
logic : core have the splitting code, the deadlines, the threats, the scripted rhetoric to play a victim card
logic : core trigger the split

Exactly what we've been anticipating. Hope we have it soon though.

i have looked at your post history.
1. you dont care about bitcoins diverse independent decentralised ethos, you are very much into REKTing anything not core. because you want centralisation
2. you are happy if core pull the trigger and split so you can double the coins to avoid losing control.
3. you dont understand non-core implementations do not have intentional banning mechanisms to take control. they will just use consensus of diversity
4. you keep talking excitedly about the price of bitcoin but lack understanding of bitcoin concepts such as consensus and diversity.

meaning you have spent more time rekting diversity in hopes of FIAT enrichment. but no actual time understanding bitcoin