On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 2:14 PM Anthony Towns <a...@erisian.com.au> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 12:13:08PM +0100, Jorge Timón wrote: > > You're not even considering user resistance in your cases. > > Of course I am. Again: > No, you're relying on miners to stop bad proposals. > > > My claim is that for *any* bad (evil, flawed, whatever) softfork, then > > > attempting activation via bip8 is *never* superior to speedy trial, > > > and in some cases is worse. > > > > > > If I'm missing something, you only need to work through a single > example > > > to demonstrate I'm wrong, which seems like it ought to be easy... But > > > just saying "I disagree" and "I don't want to talk about that" isn't > > > going to convince anyone. > > The "some cases" where bip8 with lot=true is *worse* than speedy trial > is when miners correctly see that a bad fork is bad. > > Under *any* other circumstance, when they're used to activate a bad soft > fork, speedy trial and bip8 are the same. If a resistance method works > against bip8, it works against speedy trial; if it fails against speedy > trial, it fails against bip8. > You're wrong. > > Sorry for the aggressive tone, but I when people ignore some of my points > > repeteadly, I start to wonder if they do it on purpose. > > Perhaps examine the beam in your own eye. > Yeah, whether you do that yourself or not: sorry, it's over. > Cheers, > aj >
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
