In common wiki spirit, that part should be posted at least under discussion, or possible not even be on the wiki since it is not a discussion about the article but the principal purpose of the subject.
If Luke-jr thinks this has no place on the bitcoin wiki he should vouch for the removal of the subject not argue about the principal behind it in the article.
Topic: My edit war with Luke-jr - page 3. (Read 5225 times)
LTC is a choice. Luke-jr obviously doesn't want people to have a secondary choice. He is a large investor obviously so it is once again about MONEY.
Fucking asshole lol
Fucking asshole lol
I don't find it so anti-competitive. Encouraging people to make fundamental changes and otherwise work on improving Bitcoin instead makes complete sense.
So ... I started this page some time ago.
Luke-jr came at one point and introduced this change:
I don't like his changes, and find them anti-competitive towards new alt currencies. I prefer to leave the choice up to the creators of the currencies & the market. I tried reverting his edit multiple times, but he is stubborn.
Thoughts?
Luke-jr came at one point and introduced this change:
Quote
= Why Compete? =
Bitcoin will already have hurdles to grow adoption.
There is no reason to create more by introducing competing crypto-currencies.
The first thing to ask yourself is, why not improve Bitcoin instead of competing?
Even if your changes require a "hard fork", and/or don't get a positive response from the existing Bitcoin community, you can still try them out on a (possibly incompatible) test network (clearly noted as such so people don't try to exchange/use it as real currency; eg, "Bitcoin Infinite Division Test" instead of "TinyCoin").
To date, the only established legitimate reason to start an alt chain, is if you wish to use it for a new purpose - that is, not as a currency.
= Basic Changes =
There are a number of flaws with Bitcoin that cannot be corrected without a [[Hardfork Wishlist|"hard fork"]].
Any serious alt chain should at least attempt to address these concerns and issues.
Bitcoin will already have hurdles to grow adoption.
There is no reason to create more by introducing competing crypto-currencies.
The first thing to ask yourself is, why not improve Bitcoin instead of competing?
Even if your changes require a "hard fork", and/or don't get a positive response from the existing Bitcoin community, you can still try them out on a (possibly incompatible) test network (clearly noted as such so people don't try to exchange/use it as real currency; eg, "Bitcoin Infinite Division Test" instead of "TinyCoin").
To date, the only established legitimate reason to start an alt chain, is if you wish to use it for a new purpose - that is, not as a currency.
= Basic Changes =
There are a number of flaws with Bitcoin that cannot be corrected without a [[Hardfork Wishlist|"hard fork"]].
Any serious alt chain should at least attempt to address these concerns and issues.
I don't like his changes, and find them anti-competitive towards new alt currencies. I prefer to leave the choice up to the creators of the currencies & the market. I tried reverting his edit multiple times, but he is stubborn.
Thoughts?
Jump to: