<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>Bitcoin_To_The_Oblivion wrote</title><author_name>Bitcoin_To_The_Oblivion (npub1z0…yufa9)</author_name><author_url>https://njump.me/npub1z09ely2j29qyvqaz43wyrqzmtfx72lmrqgz6xk0lm9w2z9eekyesvyufa9</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://njump.me</provider_url><html>You started misguiding again without going into nuances.&#xA;&#xA;Chainsplits created by contentious soft forks are not meant to be permanent. &#xA;&#xA;On permanent chainsplits like bcash, sure. Not the case here. &#xA;&#xA;I am not an OG like yourself but as far as I know, never in the history of Bitcoin has any exchange offered old coin and SF coin in the event of a SF. This one will be contentious and it might happen, but still one of the coins will die so it doesn&#39;t make much sense to offer the choice.&#xA;&#xA;The most frustrating part about your recent tweets/comments related to core vs knots debate (&amp; BIP 444) is 80IQ like myself gets these nuances but you don&#39;t.&#xA;&#xA;I think you get the nuances too but since you have become CORECUCK, you just chose to not get into nuances. &#xA;&#xA;</html></oembed>