there has never been a soft fork pushed through without consensus but if one were to it would natually result in a chainsplit
otherwise any of us could change bitcoin rules at will
this is basic shit
you should improve your understanding rather than continuing your harassment of me but so be it either way
Login to reply
Replies (3)
A properly written softfork only activates with say 90% consensus by a specific block height. If it doesn't reach 90% then nothing happens, nothing to see here, move along.
SegWit was a softfork that resulted in bcash hard fork a couple of weeks in advance.
History sometimes is more complex than we think.
The bcash hard fork happened mainly over SegWit ("ugly code that introduces technical debt and encourages non monetary uses" which sounds familiar if you ask me ) and not like most think solely over blocksize. Although bcash came with 8M blocks from the beginning if I remember correctly that got later increased to 32M, when BSV forked to get their infinite blocksizes.
Nobody is PUSHING this softfork without consensus. I don't know why you are making false statements.
If that's the case then you might not have seen reply like this on that BIP. Legitimate concerns are being addressed.
Why do you think any BIP will get instant buy-in from all of the plebs without any pushback/arguments?
And I am not saying chainsplit wouldn't occur.
Do you actually read anything what I said in my post?
Probably not because if that's the case then you wouldn't have said that I am harassing you.
I am just calling you out for your compromised/delusional behavior.
And where were you when shitcoin core devs were pushing changes like op_return limit without broad support from bitcoiners? You never made a big deal like this during that time.
Can you see why I keep calling you CORECUCK?

