With over 80% going with BIP91 (signalling bit 4) it looks like SegWit2x is going to be the next thing, unless those nodes are lying and are just signaling bit 4 but aren't really SegWit2x.
With the 336 block grace period after SegWit2x activates but before SegWit activates on the SegWit2x network, BIP148 can still activate since SigWit isn't activated yet creating possibly another fork. So it could be forked between BIP148 and SegWit2x. If both BIP148 and SegWit2x are forked but classic nodes still have more hashing power than either of those, then the classic node will have the longest chain with BIP148 and SegWit2x having their own forks (neither of which will accept blocks from classic miner nodes).
So if SegWit2x is a clear winner, running BIP148 will just create another possibly fork and eventually lose, assuming BIP91 nodes aren't lying. So should people not use BIP148?
If we go BIP91, we won't go SegWit2x... It's strange because many nodes are signaling support for both. Some are most likely lying.
People should use what they think that will make Bitcoin go forward, regardless of "color" and "clubistic preference"...
My big question here is why do some people think that BIP91 (SegWit2x) nodes are lying and aren't really SegWit2x? What do they have to gain by doing this? Don't they want SegWit(2x) to have more overall transactions and more total fees?
They're lying because they're one thing or another... If they choose both, they must still favor one of them. I think what's happening is that miners are really tired of this stalemate and are desperately looking for ways to scale regardless of what they really want. This will definitely end the stalemate faster, the question is, at what cost?
And yes, the main goal for them is having more transacting space in the network in order to collect more fees, while keeping the cost of transacting low. This is a win-win situation for users and miners, which some people on the forums in the last few months don't really seem to grasp/realize.
