Topic: Why not treat BU as Alt? - page 3. (Read 2351 times)

It's been very clearly described in the previous post what is Bitcoin unlimited. It's just a code implementation that's been focusing to get consensus from the entire bitcoin community. Listing it to the altcoins is not a good decision because the bug crash can be felt often with it causing a collapse to the entire crypto community.

I’m not an expert but from what I have read BU does not want a hard fork they want to reach consensus but since their solution runs contrary to the devs then a battle has erupted about the direction bitcoin is going to take.

I think if BU were an alt coin the name would be Bitcoin-BU, and we would have two currencies, the original Bitcoin and the new one with BU implement without the majority community endorsement. I don't think it's a good idea, the BTC price could decrease a lot and we would have an unstable situation, very risky...

emphasis contentious fork.

but what if BU has consensus..
.. remember BU has been around for 2 years and has set no agenda to split or do things contentiously. otherwise they would have.
also even when being offered by cores overlord and CTO gmaxwell to split officially, the community that want diverse opn dcentralsied onchain base block growth said no to him.

so although the core fanatics keep screaming about contentious forks, the only way it will happen is if core trigger it... which they seem to be planning on (UASF + PoW algo change)

which
if there was a CONTENTIOUS FORK (meaning controversial which then triggers core to open up their ban hammer) bu would be treated as the alt by not having majority..
but
if consensus occurs (the thing BU have in mind all along..) with BU having majority.. core actually becomes the altcoin.

bitfinex actually went into deeper detail
core having minority core = BCC
BU having minority bu=BCU

https://twitter.com/bitfinex/status/843226656940679170


devil is in the details of the announcement... "contentious"

Well, if I were in charge of Unlimited I would start it off as a fresh alt and forget forking completely. Their blockchain could start in a similar way to Clams, take an image of every BTC balance and start from there.

They'd have plenty of mining grunt to get up and running and no shortage of awareness. If people like what they see then they can buy in with their BTC.

Exchanges have already stated they'll list in the case of a contentious fork, no doubt they'll be delighted to list something that isn't the child of strife. If it really is superior to its daddy then the market will naturally migrate with no risks to anyone or anything.

BU is just a code implementation,

there are MANY
core, knots, fibre, bitcoinj, bitcoin ruby, BTCd, nbitcoin, statoshi, bitcoinxt, bitcoin classic, bitcoinunlimited... and so on.

bitcoin unlimited has set no deadlines, set no schedule of activation. has no zealous banscore tricks, no intention to cause a split.
bitcoin unlimiited wants consensus of many diverse nodes all on one PEER network. (bitcoin remaining diverse open and decentralisation)

however core feel its a threat to their segwit plans of a TIER network of core being the upstream filters, in control of validation and changes in future direction. so core are on the rampage fearing their loss of control..
(there should be no control anyway so anyone arguing core deserve control doesnt understand bitcoin. and is obviously involves in centralising bitcoin)

core first intentionally avoid hard(node+pool) consensus(vote) and went only for soft(pool) vote
then core uses bip9 that has some intentional banning pool/block features to turn their majority to 100% by killing off the opposition.soft(pool) contraversial

core next realised that pools were still unofficially(but a good reasoned safeguard) waited to see what node counts suggested before deciding.
so now core are going heavy. UASF and even as far as PoW algo changes hard(node+pool) bilateral split. to threaten the pools to vote for core or be struck off the network.

and now core see BU as a threat, because its giving the community another option. and risking cores dictatorship.

funny parts to remember.
1. core gave pools the vote so dont blame pools for saying no to core
2. core failed at bribing the community with fee discounts. while cunningly pushing fee's up to counter the discount
3. core will be the ones triggering the splitting of the network rather than accepting a no answer,
4. core are ignoring community views of wanting something else. because it doesnt follow the core corporate roadmap of centralised LN services to repay their $70m+ debt

meanwhile BU will keep on plodding along with no intention to do anything unless there is majority consent

Because the Bitcoin Unlimited is a fork from the bitcoin itself. It's mean if that will disrupt the crypto community.
We do not need the Bitcoin Unlimited coin. It will be worthless in the future.

There will be BUcoin and it means if there will be the hardfork for the bitcoin. With the bug on the bitcoin unlimited and a lot of the people are being scared if the hardfork will fail.

They can't drive the hardfork for well. The both are the opposite things.

When we can have both btc and BU co exist, why not treat BU like another Altcoin similar to btc?.
Why can't both compliment each other?