You don't seem to understand what's happening.

Please explain then

BIP-110 is a restrictive soft-fork. Not a permissive hard-fork. Miners will capitulate as soon as activation is mandatory. Or loose ~20% of their revenue for roughly 2% of their current profit due to Arb data on chain. If they do that then Core would be the hard fork. Not BIP-110. If miners are rational and profit motivated then they will rather loose 2% of their revenue rather than 20%.

And how a that relevant to the Lightning network that we are talking about here?

I never got lighting working with my bip110 node anyways. Back to the basics

True. And sorry I wasn't more clear. I was referring to the assumption of which side would be considered the fork. Your total correct about the issues with lightning channels.

To me it doesn’t matter how anyone defines fork, as long as LN operators don’t get rugged . Thanks for chiming in 🫡

Agreed 👍

Ok, I think I stand corrected, and there is no need to close the channels even if shit forks. But don’t trust my words, verify, it’s on you! View quoted note →