The name carries a lot of weight obviously, but the rest is not really true and eventually it will be clear to anyone who digs deeper. Bitcoin BCH and Bitcoin BTC will both have to compete on merit rather than in the comment section in social media.
(r/Bitcoin is irrelevant in the discussion since they - regardless of not having had a clear standard for what Bitcoin actually is - have chosen sides. As is BitcoinTalk, BitcoinWiki and Bitcoin.org, being owned by the same group of people. r/BTC at least allows dissenting opinions.)
Ignore the trolls, ignore Roger, ignore the fake Satoshi. It all won't matter in the end. Ignore Theymos, ignore Cobra and ignore Blockstream etc. Ignore conspiracy theories from both sides. Look at the tech.
Which fork will win out is not yet certain, but so far one is an experiment in "on chain" scaling and the other in "off chain" scaling. I think we can benefit from running both, even if the actual Bitcoin design prescribed on chain scaling and even said how.
For one thing Coke is a brand and a product, so the example suggested above with Coca Cola doesn't work very well. But a better example would be if a constant ingredient in the recipe - such as the constant increase in blocksize - for Coke was no longer being added or if it was being transitioned away from over time, such that the recipe still available to the public on the bottles was a different one from the actual ingredients. Then someone could legitimately claim that it was not "Coke, per the recipe". Even if the product was still known as Coke.
Both drinks might be enjoyable and the newer one might have better success. But objectively speaking, it wouldn't be the same drink anymore.
I agree with some of what your saying personally I'm not a fan of either so not like a Bitcoin guy that's defending it not at all. Just some of the stuff they have done like having the same color for there logos green is associated with BCASH, to call it Bitcoin core remember most people are numb nuts so that makes a difference. Allowing payments in only BCASH for miners. If this was the real world people would be pissed and it wouldn't be allowed but this is crypto land so anything goes, the fact that they have just changed it on Bitcoin.com says it all they know they are wrong. I hope they both do well because I hold a bit of both but this petty shit ain't getting either party anywhere fast
I agree with some of what your saying personally I'm not a fan of either so not like a Bitcoin guy that's defending it not at all. Just some of the stuff they have done like having the same color for there logos green is associated with BCASH, to call it Bitcoin core remember most people are numb nuts so that makes a difference. Allowing payments in only BCASH for miners. If this was the real world people would be pissed and it wouldn't be allowed but this is crypto land so anything goes, the fact that they have just changed it on Bitcoin.com says it all they know they are wrong. I hope they both do well because I hold a bit of both but this petty shit ain't getting either party anywhere fast
I agree with some of what your saying personally I'm not a fan of either so not like a Bitcoin guy that's defending it not at all. Just some of the stuff they have done like having the same color for there logos green is associated with BCASH, to call it Bitcoin core remember most people are numb nuts so that makes a difference. Allowing payments in only BCASH for miners. If this was the real world people would be pissed and it wouldn't be allowed but this is crypto land so anything goes, the fact that they have just changed it on Bitcoin.com says it all they know they are wrong. I hope they both do well because I hold a bit of both but this petty shit ain't getting either party anywhere fast
Green is "the" new color. But it is an open source project comprised of many disperse projects and lacks official client, color or other packaging, so people choose different colors. -I personally think certain decisions such as these should be enshrined as contracts between the different involved parties on the blockchain itself.
It's funny how all of a sudden the effects of property rights in combination with how Bitcoin was designed are sneered on and simultaneously hailed as the solution; How some want to make Bitcoin into a controlled brand or a commodity to be defined by current majority opinion.
They WOULD be competing on merit if Very Wrong Ver hadn't used social-engineering tricks to dupe newbies into thinking BCash/BCH was Bitcoin.
That speaks to a more underhanded and sleazy tactic that a con-man would use to trick people out of their money.
Very Wrong Ver's altfork is the only one that is claiming to be Bitcoin, is using naming tactics as such, and until recently, was promoting his own ego-project as what you'd get if you wanted "Bitcoin".
This is called fraud, and the lawsuit should be very revealing - especially in the discovery phase. There's more coming, but its probably best to let it happen naturally.
If the judge knows anything about the document that actually defined what Bitcoin is, she'd throw the case out in a heartbeat.
You know full well about the selective bans on r/Bitcoin and the social media spam. You're side is not innocent.
Very Wrong Ver has made a big deal out of "censorship".
He has had lengthy access to 500k Twitter followers, a .com domain he is currently running, been on TV shows that are distributed around the world.
His posts on Steemit are still up, too.
Where is the "censorship"? Its in his head, and when he wants to pull out the victim card, its the first thing that flies out of his lying mouth.
Don't even get me started on the downvote-brigade that is r/btc -- if you so much as TRY to oppose the Ver gospel, you get downvoted into oblivion.
Very Wrong Ver is in trouble - because any discovery will show his underhanded deception in the plain light of day. He may even be going back to jail because of it.
Don't lie. I post there regularly. It's all about how you say it.
Obviously a troll attitude and baseless attacks won't be welcomed (unless they're pro BCH, it's Reddit after all), but that has more to do with your own personality than it has to do with Ver.
All very strong technical arguments.
Seriously, you can't see the duplicity in that statement? That you have to walk on eggshells, stay in line, or you get gang-rushed and obliterated? What kind of ethical compass do you have? Its absurd.
Very Wrong Ver is a technical argument, because Ver has been wrong, and will continue being wrong.
Misrepresenting his ego-project as something else is just one facet of his wrongness.
But naturally, you're staring at the bark -- missing the forest all around you. I find this is a common trait with Very Wrong Ver's disciples, trading short-term "fixes" for long-term sustainability.
Sad.
No, not really. I don't think I've ever done that. When I forcefully disagree, I forcefully disagree. Perhaps I'm just more picky with what I choose to get agitated over and how I express myself by default? I don't know for sure, but you're messages in general would certainly seem to imply this.
Moving the goalposts again, I see.
We're talking about Very Wrong Ver's sub-reddit -- and his followers actively swamp any post that is not to their liking with aggressive downvotes.
Are you drunk? This is the second time you've played the fool -- unless you're always like this.
Ver is a con artist and has a cult following nothing you can do to make them see sense. Also they have been Mislead into buying a copy coin and they stuck so they have to justify it being the real Bitcoin. They should have tried the name Bitcoin copy and see how many people bought into it if it's it such a great coin
"Bitcoin Cash" pretty much IS "Bitcoin Copy" even to newbs. It's hard to see that "Cash" on there and not think "knockoff". Then again half of the US voted for Trump so people are clearly easily duped.
In the general sense that you imply here, simply not true.
Roger may not have the strongest arguments, but he's not actively trying to deceive other people as much as he can be moody and not always fully honest with himself in argumentative situations.
Many in the BCH camp are criticizing Roger both privately and publicly. Currently there is even a notable split in the BCH community over whether labeling Bitcoin Cash "Bitcoin", with or without "BCH" behind it, is fraudulent or not. Even if I don't usually agree with him, in this case I don't think it was fraud.
Since the very beginning, people like "the evil miner" Jihan Wu has been publicly opposed to calling Bitcoin Cash anything but "Bitcoin Cash", restating this publicly a couple times. So not even the supposed pumpers in this group are not consistently agreeing.
The evil miner he is trying to make money just like Lord roger but he is evil and Rogers the ones that dealt with him but he isn't evil. If one is then the other must be. When has an angel ever worked with the devil. Ok his not a con artist but he is just as a big if not bigger cunt as Wu
This may surprise you, but I have perhaps more respect for Jihan than I have for Roger. Jihan actually has fairly well thought out opinions and is usually a very level headed guy. Calling him a cunt for creating and mining using the best possible hardware and wanting to support competing chains is a little low imo.
Calling him evil is a bit lower imo
Sure, but I'm also remarking on your use of language. "Cunt" is inprecise smear and is quite frankly what I'd expect to hear from an adolescent. In that sense I consider it lower.
Very Wrong Ver continues to be wrong -- which is why there's a large lawsuit headed his way. During the discovery phase, I'm sure there will be a lot of interesting details to the lengths of his deception and underhanded dealings.
His whole strategy depends on usurping the Bitcoin name, because without it his altfork remains just that -- an ego-project that is doomed to the long tail of altcoin obsolescence.
I suppose once an ex-con, always a convict -- and he may very well be headed back to a jail cell after his fraudulent activities.