" Hard forks are evil, and only core dev knows what best for bitcoin. "
I think core is attempting to, and successfully, using the resultant recent smart contract coin change and split, to argue that there should never be any bitcoin forks because, 'see what happens'. I think they are succeeding in this argument. And sorry, I'm being facetious with regards to 1mb4eva since even Nullc conceded that LN needs bigger blocks (4mb). However, all of this will be done under the benevolent leadership of our overlords. Hail hydra.. err core. I think this proposal allows them to continue to consolidate power. I think you are right that we need to show that hard forks are pretty easy. And the most recent hard fork was pretty easy, then polo started screwing everyone and made a bundle of money and stabbed the ecosystem in the back. I have hope for a miner revolt but this just means it needs to happen sooner or the opportunity will be lost forever.
I do not understand how anyone can see this as an argument against HF's. ETH's value didnt crash,( my short is underwater ~ -4%) nothing bad happened. if anything this proves that HFs, even ones that result in a split, isn't going to cause much problems at all, the weaker fork simply gets viewed as an altcoin and the majority just sorta ignore it.
thats the thing, 1MB cannot stand, a HF to bump up block limit is REQUIRED. there is no way around it, so why would we not bump it NOW, LN will require this later, and we could make use of >1MB block now, so wtf is the hold up for?
they will now need to back track on all there silly arguments later when LN requires bigger blocks.
Look at you still on the same talking points, over and over and over.
One day you say, "o.k. I can accept where we are, o.k. increase the blocksize limit later." Then the next day you are back to those already worn out arguments, "we need a blocksize limit increase, now, now now!!! There is no reason why not, now now now!!!"
You know I repeat my same response too, and that is that so many of you big block fucktards continue to repeat over and over, and suggest that the burden is on Core to explain why it is not taking some kind of action to increase the blocksize limit, and the fact of the matter is that the burden of production of evidence and the burden of persuasion regarding any such evidence, if it were to exist, is not on Core to explain why it is not taking the actions that you would like. Both the burden of production and persuasion is on folks who want the change, and those folks are no fucking where even close to meeting either of those burdens, even though they continue to whine about it and continue to erroneously (and maybe even purposefully in a trolling manner) suggest that Core has some kind of burdens in this regard.
Tried and worn out arguments and gone over many times, no? Oh no, let's just keep raising the arguments over and over and over, even though we have no further evidence and no better logic to support such a position.
Edit: In other words, based on reading some of Adams subsequent posts from just a little bit ago, today, it appears that he is reverting back into nearly full retard mode. Meltdown or what?