MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55D69986.3000307@riseup.net>
References: <CAE-z3OWvA99Z9+wZ0K3XdKGZAV_XkJWYydw+Bo7tr4Oa2jQEWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<55D69986.3000307@riseup.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:03:36 +0100
Message-ID: <CAE-z3OWMvphHzSr3qcjUC5XdWGFV-6yCcfFwTdOFnBvvxsiWVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tier Nolan <tier.nolan@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11475dda337003051dd03804
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Economic majority vote by splitting coins
Precedence: list

--001a11475dda337003051dd03804
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:22 AM, odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
wrote:

> That's interesting.  But in all honesty I don't see most users being
> able to pull off what you are describing.


The idea assumes that it is a BIP + soft fork.  This means that most
wallets would support/recognise the encumbered coins.

Even if only some wallets support it, you can still move your coins
around.  Only the people who are trading between XT and Core would need to
have wallets that support it.

If you consolidate x BTC-Core and x BTC-XT into a single output, then you
can convert it back to a normal output.


> If they are convinced that it is needed its

> use will grow but they won't realize how bad they will be misled until
> later, at which point it will be...
>
> .. Too Late
>

That is the point, this gives a sneak preview.  At minimum, it shows which
choice will give the highest BTC value.

--001a11475dda337003051dd03804
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:22 AM, odinn <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net" target=3D"_blank">odinn.cyberguerrilla=
@riseup.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
That&#39;s interesting.=C2=A0 But in all honesty I don&#39;t see most users=
 being<br>
able to pull off what you are describing.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>T=
he idea assumes that it is a BIP + soft fork.=C2=A0 This means that most wa=
llets would support/recognise the encumbered coins.<br></div><div><br></div=
><div>Even if only some wallets support it, you can still move your coins a=
round.=C2=A0 Only the people who are trading between XT and Core would need=
 to have wallets that support it.<br><br></div><div>If you consolidate x BT=
C-Core and x BTC-XT into a single output, then you can convert it back to a=
 normal output.<br></div><br><br>&gt; If they are convinced that it is need=
ed its<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
use will grow but they won&#39;t realize how bad they will be misled until<=
br>
later, at which point it will be...<br>
<br>
.. Too Late<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That is the point, this giv=
es a sneak preview.=C2=A0 At minimum, it shows which choice will give the h=
ighest BTC value.<br></div></div></div></div>

--001a11475dda337003051dd03804--