Self custody for sure. To my understanding: The "contentiousness" has to be significantly enough for the chain split to last, so that both coins are listed at exchanges - with a market developing. This is when the concept of economic notes matters: the market decides which coin is more valuable, it will then attract hash rate. It can't occur without *the listing* / market

You say "overwhelming consensus", but by whom? If most miners chose 444, non compliant blocks would be discarded by them, and your core node would go with the longest chain, no? If that was the case you would need something like a URSF to force a split, right? I want the tokens or a prediction market so I can see the actual consensus. Something more sybil resistant than loud twitter users/bots. This is starting to feel a lot like the block size war, not on content, but by the type of people who support each side, and their arguments. Back then it was. x: bigger blocks will lower fees y: not long term and it's a bad way to scale x: fuck you, you want high fees.