Yeah, I've been pretty underspoken on this one, cautious.

In this very thread, Fallingknife did get a difficult consensus to merge-mine with BTC, got Bryce's opinion, and communicated back to Bryce that we've ultimately consented to this.  I know all this from only reading this thread.

The sidechains~?  Definitely has to be a part of his twitter self-promotion.  I guess his business model is as a Cryptocurrency Consultant.  I imagine he's raking in the dough with that.

Did we agree on the sidechains?  I'm pretty sure I have not, nor do I explicitly consent to it.

I don't adequately understand sidechains to have a worthy opinion on the subject!

-

Well, Bryce is busy, and we are undoubtedly privileged to have his skills on board.  If he's working on merge-mining with BTC, as he should, which has to be a fork, then why not add value to UNO with the sidechains, too?  That's cutting-edge.  My gut tells me this is a positive development, and may prove to be another privilege.  I think the rockchain can handle it.

My bias remains BTC positive, which many of you disagree with.  The information I have that forms this opinion isn't easily communicated.  It's powerful, but also it is questionable.  Like the casino game voice says, "Anything can happen; anyone can win!"  

-All just in my goofy, underqualified opinion.

I'm thinking by "fully consent" you mean 100% agreement in the final plan.  I don't think this is even reasonable.  The argument for corruptible centralization has been that you cannot act quickly enough by committee.  I'm ok with 70% agreement or othewise silent consent on this one.  (Because I'm BTC-positive.)

-

Think about it - BTC is less-demonized by the powers that be these days.  Huge corps and entities are buying BTC up.  That they are depressing the price is almost an homage to cryptocurrency philosophy.  ...So is there really no $1M/day to pay for BTC's inflation???  I think the money actually is there.  (There's a whole lot to my BTC-positive bias that isn't discussed, here.)

What about UNO?  Fact is that it's largely ignored.

I'm thinking add the merge-mining and sidechains with BTC, and the price of this scarce, top-shelf investment cryptocommodity is 0.10 BTC's and goes up from there.

-

Maybe some of you aren't interested in a huge, sustainable price gain in UNO?  Still 'accummulating'?  The whales on here have enough, and the health of Unobtanium long-term is in wider distribution.  Even a whaleshare is worth more with less in this case.  It's counter-intuitive.

Try positive-thinking....Say this very meaningfully to yourself very slowly a number of emotion-consenting times:

"Goood things, are coming your way."  "It is ok for me to be successful."  "I am ready for success."

bitcoin hardfork discussion:

thread1:
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/919629.0

thread 2:
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/941331.0

thread 3:
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/946236.0


there's currently an epic show going down

I would strongly argue the opposite.  This IS the time to act, and there may only be weeks left to accomplish this.  Perhaps Bryce knows this, too, and thus the quasi-urgency.

It is clear to me that BTC's power is grossly underestimated, here.

Think about it, what will a tremendous gain in BTC do to Unobtanium's price?  The $USD is about to massive fail.  This is very serious stuff.  Do we even know who hold the whale's share of UNO?  No.  ...And we don't know how they will respond.  This is more risky than adding sidechains for sure.

Add great value to Unobtanium, and the uncertainty is significantly mitigated.

I don't know what that is, and I don't think I'm interested.

Sink or swim:  These changes under discussion bring great stability to Unobtanium in terms of network.

How can you argue with this point?  (I don't need to be explicit with what this really means, given current circumstances in mining and government coersion.)

Let's say sidechains become a standard feature in many coins. How do we benefit from it?
Let's say contrary to that: sidechains are a failure because they have a  fatal flaw (not yet discovered) which will be revealed later. How do we benefit from that?

Can you show how exactly are they bringing in more hashpower? What are the benefits they provide for us?



Correct these  discussions tend to be very stressful.

here for sidechains info:
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/831527.0

(still very controversal, the press is hyping it though. Only few actually understand it)

this is possible, even probable (if no unforseen problems occure on the way of course) imo

i'm leaning towards a vote for NO action, side chains or merged mining.  at least no action for 5 months.  i don't see any threat of dropping hash and with rising price the hash will also rise.  why dilute the pure chain we have here for a threat that isn't really there?

sounds like bryce has got his head in the clouds again and maybe thinking a little too much like its "his coin."  can we gently reel him in, back down to earth for a few?  what would it take to get him to have a brief conversation with us here?  I really don't like that there's a bit of a disconnect between him and the community

but for real, though, the guy i REALLY want to hear from, and who's opinion would hold the most weight with me would be Blazr2.  that guy is the real deal.