...
1. No one is forcing, or is it everyone is opposing, doublethink.
well it is my understanding that this BIP148 is a rushed decision forcing the segwit activation to happen.
2. UASF, soft fork is much better option than getting a hard fork involved and probably collapsing everything, there might be a split, but still a major chance to recover.
what hard fork? as far as i know SegWit has always been a softfork!
but this UASF has a much higher risk of splitting the chain and collapsing everything than any well thought and with majority support fork has. and that is a big risk, specially when the price (subject of this topic) is concerned.
3. Scaling means risk, it is the foundation of what BTC or any other crypto is. You do not want to scale, stagnate your growth, it's cool, but see bitcoin does not have that choice, supply and demand does not come with much choices.
not at all. scaling doesn't mean risk. look at Litecoin. it activated segwit without any problems.
it is forcing the scaling that is risky and the more you insist on a fork with small amount of support the higher the risk will be.
why do you think SegWit activation target is set to >95%?
4. We/not mine your we/failing to grasp important matters/is suicidal for your thought process.
sorry i don't understand this sentence
Chill buddy.
i can't when i see support for UASF
- from nodes is very small
- from hashrate is very small
- from developers is also small. (many of them are against it!)
1. If segwit does not get activated by 95% nor the 51% of BIP148. Left is BIP149 which the core is in favor of and from what I read it would take 2018, cool. Let one more year of congested, high fees monopoly continue and existing price and users should also continue. Awesome.
2. Have you heard of Jihan Wu, BU. Yeah risk of splitting is obviously there, two sides with opposite opinion and approximately same hashpower, nope same, but miners changes everything. What do you expect. Getting a majority, good luck with that. If that happens too damn good for the community. If BIP148 gets rolling Segwit would be activated, so I don't see any harm in that, split would be temporary, non-segwit miners would not have any other choice other than switching
3. Are you kidding? Based on adoption there is no comparison. If litecoin would have been globally adopted like BTC before Segwit, simple logic for you, more users = more transactions, the whole scenario would have been messy like right now.
4. That is beyond your grasp
"Every small step in the right direction counts."