📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18
📝 Original message:There's some actually proposing inaction as an outright decision, but I
more meant that at times it has felt like we would end up with inaction
through momentum, combined with adoption rate making any hard fork more
complex if it continues to be delayed.
On 18/06/2015 22:42, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> On Thursday, 18 June 2015, at 8:31 pm, Ross Nicoll wrote:
>> I may disagree with Mike & Gavin on timescale, but I do believe there's
>> a likelihood inaction will kill Bitcoin
> An honest question: who is proposing inaction? I haven't seen anyone in this whole, agonizing debate arguing that 1MB blocks are adequate. The debate has been about *how* to increase the block-size limit and whether to take action ASAP (at the risk of fracturing Bitcoin) or to delay action for further debate (at the risk of overloading Bitcoin). Even those who are arguing for further debate are not arguing for *inaction*.
Ross Nicoll [ARCHIVE] /
npub10p…pfaef
2023-06-07 17:38:39
in reply to nevent1q…k3mn
Author Public Key
npub10plv6jx6pktpp5ezldnus6kj8ffg045g2kdjl78w23njrlveqy5s3pfaefPublished at
2023-06-07 17:38:39Event JSON
{
"id": "0e2a2a79f1e6ca44d9fbce7f31ed41193906f2c8b690ea9a0a2dbff1f8b99d4b",
"pubkey": "787ecd48da0d9610d322fb67c86ad23a5287d688559b2ff8ee546721fd990129",
"created_at": 1686152319,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"23c1bb2f25b9e7356b48aa2a86751c4f26fb3977b440917a1cb3512c200b0b2f",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"0acb7f84e93d9979149295ceddc550149ea78008027401868796826918ab2cf4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"8be4d6a7fffe0afa37fb93c368165a4b57f6973c7841f2a367d34cb879d71b0c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-06-18\n📝 Original message:There's some actually proposing inaction as an outright decision, but I \nmore meant that at times it has felt like we would end up with inaction \nthrough momentum, combined with adoption rate making any hard fork more \ncomplex if it continues to be delayed.\n\nOn 18/06/2015 22:42, Matt Whitlock wrote:\n\u003e On Thursday, 18 June 2015, at 8:31 pm, Ross Nicoll wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I may disagree with Mike \u0026 Gavin on timescale, but I do believe there's\n\u003e\u003e a likelihood inaction will kill Bitcoin\n\u003e An honest question: who is proposing inaction? I haven't seen anyone in this whole, agonizing debate arguing that 1MB blocks are adequate. The debate has been about *how* to increase the block-size limit and whether to take action ASAP (at the risk of fracturing Bitcoin) or to delay action for further debate (at the risk of overloading Bitcoin). Even those who are arguing for further debate are not arguing for *inaction*.",
"sig": "8ef9d29d13e3175d13b288d3f7a23c91f596f9b0ff47187593b9b86431b3f15018c3dfc303c6237fc2ad7240f1c846430d672b47e9ed06cf493ab79090b53c56"
}