traincarswreck, there are several threads here where people are calling him out on the scaling proposals but this isn't one of them. I get that you feel strongly about this issue, and this "deal" thread my seem like a diversion and waste of time. Understandable.
Still, this thread has been linked in a blog article that has been tweeted all over the place.
So yeah, Roger can post here and on Youtube and then say "nah, nevermind" but for the many people who are not following the technical debate, any bit of light that can be shed on the character of the major players could serve them in deciding where they stand.
So maybe it is just fluff but I'll take accountability where I can get it at this point.
Roger has done nothing but lie and extrapolate on a political agenda that is not founded in any founded economic theory whatsoever.
I present 20 years of works on the subject of ramifications of the advent of an e-currency with a stably issued supply by probably the smartest man that ever existed.
Nothing here in regard to this bet is going to change anyone's opinion. Roger wants control of bitcoin, and he'll take it even if its only such control that can create political tension that the media will pick up on.
That each of you don't constantly call him out for having an unfounded argument is simply a testament that none of you understand the macro economic implications of bitcoin or the purpose and nature of money itself.