also its not the pools that are to blame for the fee's... pools dont write code that becomes bitcoins protocol, they didnt make the rules or make the lack of rules. it was the bitcoin core devs that decided on the uncontrolled wild west auction market of fee's rather than a structured fee formulae
You are one of the most trusted people in the forum on these issues. So you think the decisions are right now? Would it be better if miners could take the initiative? And does the difference between today's Bitcoin coding and Satoshi's original coding scare you too?
1. i dont want to be one of the most trusted people. i just want to counter the propaganda so that people can think independently and trust their own opinions/do their own research by having a valid counter argument to the lame stuff some spew out
2. comparing bitcoins ethos/purpose of 2009 to bitcoins ethos/purpose of 2019 things have changed dramatically. the devs went full on wild west with fee management rather than act like devs and code something. purely to then use the wild west as a reason to then say bitcoin is failing so they could promote their VC invested other networks for commercial gain.
3. pools are limited to what they can actually do. too much propaganda is placed on pools in regards to how deadly a 51% attack would be, however it wouldnt change rules, it would just change what transactions were confirmed vs unconfirmed in a chain re-org.
4. that said pools could decide to not include certain transactions as a boycott such as
avoid the discounted segwit transactions(false discount as its actually legacy=4x not segwit=/4)
avoid transactions that have less than 6 confirms
avoid transactions over $2
and so on.
the only problem is that there are over 20 pools. so while one pool might implement an initiative to try to change users fee habits. it would only affect 5-15% of blocks depending on how popular the pool is at mining