Thanks for saving me the time.
View quoted note →
Login to reply
Replies (6)
Really liked these guys. It’s a shame. The obvious conclusion is that they are tied up with investments that benefit from the filter blowout?
That’d be a fair assumption
No that doesnt make sense. If its actually hurtful to bitcoin, then that would be a worse financial decision for their own bags than whatever investment outside of bitcoin that could motivate this approach.
You still work on the premise that:
1) they actually realise the severity of the problem BIP110 tries to solve
2) they are purely bitcoin driven and not looking for fiat returns of their investments, which is a big assumption
Yes, completely abandoning all faith in people who have otherwise showed integrity for a decade is problematic. Doing so seems immature to me. Obviously I could be wrong, but I'd rather be wrong and have had some faith in humanity than be right and lose anyway.
>> "not bitcoin driven"
I dont feel Odell has given us any reason to believe he is a bad actor.
In fact, him arguing from an emotional standpoint in latest RHR screams to me that he is shaken by the prospect of bitcoin failing as a result of this debacle - because he and his family rely on bitcoin.
>> "severity of problems bip110 tries to solve"
Ironically, Odells emotional response is kind of signalling a deep (subconcious) understanding of the severity of the problem that core30 introduced.
I.e. the attack vector that makes Odell fear the prospects of bip110. He just doesnt realize it and projects his anger towards luke and mechanic.
@ODELL, honestly, lets just for arguments sake agree that luke and mechanic are attackers of bitcoin. WHO GAVE THEM THIS "CLEVER" ATTACK VECTOR.
My issue with Odell is straightforward: he zeroes in on one of four possible scenarios — ironically the worst one and the least likely — and frames it to his large audience as if it’s the only realistic outcome.
That’s my problem.
Does he genuinely believe that’s the base case? Is he misinformed? I’d rather assume it’s the first. The cleanest proof would be a reversal of his stance if the facts don’t support it.
So far, though, nothing he’s done gives me much confidence. I’ll happily admit I misjudged him if he proves otherwise.