There is no resolution mechanism for the relay policy dispute. My hunch is this fight will persist for a long time. It is likely in my view that the share of knots nodes running on the network will keep growing as a result.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Number of nodes is meaningless. Happened with Bcash. And bsv.

I agree, but they had a resolution mechanism. They forked off and then the market decided. That can't happen here.

I'm not sure about the 'can't happen' part.

What if a vulnerability affects only one client?

Then they'll patch and carry on.

Yeah. I hope sthg like this won't happen but I'm sure if it does the drama level goes to 11.

And that will be good for Bitcoin - as many as possible Bitcoin Knots nodes who filter as much as possible spam and CSAM.

Truth is out there.

We all know what Citrea did. And then Core started the propaganda.

Core censored contributors opinions for mentioning Citrea, core gaslighted, core attacked Bitcoin Knots nodes ...

The qustion is if Core will continue to act in bad faith?

nostr:nevent1qqs8nhp3tkj9dtvgd3um8lk44hmppttfa0ug453f304a9yduqwxme8sppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qy08wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yttsw43zuam9d3kx7unyv4ezumn9wshszyrhwden5te0dehhxarj9ekk7mf037rlx7

Mossad ran 9/11 Arab "hijacker" terrorist operation

By Wayne Madsen

https://www.ord.io/72990614

Incorrect.

The resolution mechanism is Nodes enforcing their Will upon the Miners, by activating a Softfork.

Not sure how you want to resolve a dispute about the effect of policy with a soft fork. Seems unrelated.

Softfork to introduce new Consensus Rule maximum limit on OP_Return at 83 Bytes.

That won't solve this dispute, it is about prohibiting relay of data embedding transactions in general.

Yep.

Run a node.

Stack sats.

Don’t shitcoin.

Go outside.

πŸ§‘πŸ‘ŠπŸ»πŸ»