Bitcoin Classic does not have a majority of anything, if that even matters.

“The surveys show that the majority wants classic . And after thinking twice it would be good to become independent from the Core branch which is used by Blockstream to profit their business model”

TG: What survey? Who organized the survey? How many people took part? Do they want classic or just a bigger blocksize?

TG: This is all bitcoin users in all languages or mainly people that like classic, I mean really come on. Even at that “survey” classic is not the majority, unlimited is LOL. Classic is 5th place, so hardly a majority want it, even if you use that website that is so non scientific and extremly uninclusive,Is there a chinese version of that “survey” hummm, no

@theogoodman difficult to see what you stand for. I mean it’s somehow clear that the blocksize must be increased — Gavin is probably the most experienced developer in that space — what speaks against classic”

So now instead of explaining how Classic is a majority the person goes to attack me. Asking what I stand for. I have said so many times that I am in favor of dynamic blocks and not against an increase just not classic. This gets ignored.

TG: Is this what I stand for? I asked how Clasisc is a majority so lets not change subjects

“LOL” (no answer, no majoirty, no nothing)

“So you do not have an opinion and you constantly argue against anything. ..”

This argument happens when you point out that there is something wrong with things that were presented as facts. Still not willing to admit that classic is not a majoirty even on the site that it should be. No answer to the orginal question about where classic is a majority and where this info came from. Instead personal attacks.

“Can we please present arguments coherently?”

TG: Classic is not a majoirty point, that is my argument.

“I do not attack you — but the way you spread fud in many groups is strange”

TG: What fud exactly? Basicly when people dont agree “fud”so now we have the claim that classic is majoirty, when you point out that it is not “fud”

  • Here comes more deflection, still the first question is not answered and not delt with instead attacks on the messenger-

“Give your point instead to start arguing against any scalability solution”

I said I am for BIP 106 before segwit, I said I am for dynamic blocks.

(this is not good enough, you need to be black or white core or classic otherwise where to place you? people like compartments and to organize things exactly where they belong)

“The blocksize must be lifted at some point”

TG: Yes I agree, just not classic

“This discussion is becoming irksome.”

“Yes it is”

TG: What is becoming irksome is peopel that say classic is majoirty but it is not, when you ask for proof there is none, I am willing to look at any

TG: I am still wating for the links to this FUD I am spreading,. please explain

Only silence after that , and of course getting told that I am chatting too much as if chat is a limited resource.

I was accused of “spreading fud” but still do not know what fud I am spreading.

I asked where classic is a majoirty and still have not been shown that.

If it is not ok to ask questions then there is a problem.

If people that ask questions and do not agree with someones opinon are just accused of “spreading fud” then maybe they need to back it up and say what they mean.

Where and When was this so called FUD spread?

You can not have your cake and eat it too, complain about others while accusing others of what you are complaing about.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Theo Goodman’s story.