Why should this "power" include telling other people what software they can or can't run? If users could do that (and I'm glad they can't) THEN the system has failed. Users will always have the freedom to decide which chain they wish to transact on. Why isn't that enough for you? Why do you want to dictate terms to people who don't owe you a damn thing?
The same reason for which the corporate baboons, i.e. attackers attempt to hijack the name Bitcoin for their own terms. Users with actual knowledge about the system, should educate and spread the use of
Bitcoin clients not "cancer altcoin disguised as Bitcoin" clients.
Your use of the word "listening" here distinctly implies not just "hearing" what the community and developers are saying, but also "obeying". Hence slave. They listened. They just didn't agree.
The latter is a lie and you are being fed kool-aid. Pretty much anyone who understands Segwit, which does not include Ver, Jihan, Wright, Oliver, Thomas, etc., embraces Segwit. Jihan has
been paying for anti-Segwit propaganda in China a few months ago. Wake up.
And you'll still, most likely, be complaining about how terrible they all supposedly are, despite the fact there's nothing you can do to prevent their involvement.
"Supposedly" is the wrong wording unless you're delusional. Bonus: That's a false generalization fallacy right there.
And even if you could prevent their involvement, you'd have to sacrifice one of Bitcoin's primary tenets of permisionlessness in order to do so. It's far simpler just to let them get on with whatever the hell they want to do. You can still run whatever code you want. Beyond that, you're as impotent as everyone else.
False. You can fork away the current miners.
Until 5 minutes pass and they find another boogeyman to plead for someone in authority to "save" us from.
It was fine until we got Anderesen'd, Hearnia'd. Now only two people are left in the way of a peaceful Bitcoin.
Quite a lot of people are morons in that regard. It's all getting a bit too overprotective and interfering lately. Like people who whine about forks having the name "Bitcoin" in them because it might confuse people, or those who would gladly prefer to restrict freedom in the name of supposed security. Hardly the cypherpunk values Bitcoin was founded upon.
Alright; you need to be an idiot to stand by (or even condone) while malicious actors deceive individuals, cause damage to said individuals, and then proceed label people who fights against such malevolent action non cypherpunk. Then again, Ver has an army of shills in his company. You never know who you're talking to.
I'm not here saying any "side" has any kind of moral high ground. Both have done stupid, petty crap.
No. Bitcoin Core, as a group of independent individuals has done nothing wrong. Yet Garzik, Ver, Jihan keep attacking them and condoning attacks on them.
So going forward, we need to stop having "sides".
Wrong. We need the idiots out of the way. They can fork into an altcoin, without
stealing the name Bitcoin and we'd be much better off.
Freedom of choice
Go away already.