It is weird to me saylor supposedly does not want to softfork in covenants. He does not want reactive security on all that btc he owns? Same goes for Coinbase or all the other custody players in the space, you'd think it would potentially lower insurance costs and stuff no?
Part of me things Saylor just wants to avoid any potential FUD during what he feels is this pivotal moment.
Please Login to reply.
No replies yet.