Complaints from Bitcoin Users

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

99.999% of people involved in bitcoin have absolutely no say in the activation of segwit. It's literally just up to Blockstream/Core

"to convince about 8 miners" - Adrian-X

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

They have legitimate concerns (read the slides by Jeff on SegWit).

"what gives you the right to judge what miners or wallet providers do or don't do. I don't like this elite thinking, and it's not in the spirit of Bitcoin." - Egon_1

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I think that SegWit is a poor implementation and that there can be better ways of accomplishing what it does.

"I don't have any malace against those developers; I just think that they are poor leaders, act unethically, and are not putting bitcoin in the right direction." - ProHashing

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Stop fucking up

"Bitcoin" - LovelyDay

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

the core people, and those in charge,

"are very out of touch with how to make good software." - xhiggy

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Garzik is right of course, and despite the claims of 1.8x scaling through SegWit (hardly a large number to begin with), in the short-term the scaling will be more along the lines of 1.05x and the effect on fee reduction will be minimal at best. I could be wrong, but I think most random bitcoin users never use P2SH "multi-sig" addresses, rendering some of SegWit's benefits moot right from the outset.

"Why does it seem like the B.U. crew, Tom Zander, and others are continually innovating and progressing despite having 95% less funding than Blockstream and far fewer developers than Core, as well?" - ChairmanOfBitcoin

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Earlier in the year I predicted we most likely won't see any use of segwit in practice until at least october or later and that the april timeline was total BS. Sep 23rd now and SW isn't even in a production release yet, let alone on its way to main net activation.

"Looks like I was pretty spot on." - cryptonaut420

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

just another

"stalling tactic." - hodls

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

we still have people working hard on Bitcoin, not because of the money and how much can be made on Bitcoin, but because of Bitcoin itself and what short sighted people do not realize what it represents, monetary freedom we all agree on that is supposed to be free from this political control and stagnation

"BS has brought us" - DaSpawn

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I've got a decade of SEO experience and would like to see Roger and his team succeed. I'm sure a lot of you would to.

"If you are a webmaster or blogger drop an HTML link to www.bitcoin.com using the anchor text "Bitcoin" to help them overtake Bitcoin.org as the first search result for the search "Bitcoin" on Google." - UncensorBitcoin

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Complaints from users, Day 76 (24/09/2016):

IPFS Protocol Selects Ethereum Over Bitcoin,

"Prefers Ethereum Dev Community" - knight222

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

There will probably more projects switching from bitcoin to ethereum for obvious reasons. bitcoin is stagnating, ethereum is rising. e.g. factom people also stated,

"that they can migrate to ethereum..." - humbrie

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

the new teams all get shut out

"of any discussions." - ThePenultimateOne

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Bitcoin did a hard fork to fix inflation hack

"when it was not as young as ETH." - cptmcclain

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Core hates ETH only because the mind share going to it and the hard fork

"that completely blew their arguments up." - johnnycryptocoin

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Why should we trust people who openly support censorship of dissenting opinions

"to protect the censorship resistance of Bitcoin?" - MemoryDealers

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Here is plain as day proof of the censorship for you:

"bitcoin-discussion/a-question-for-u-nul ... 10246.html" - MemoryDealers

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Bitcoin is being hi-jacked by blockstream. Blockstream also benefits from bitcoin not growing since their business model relies on bitcoin's transaction limit and fixing this would leave them out. For more detail and evidence you can read this comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/4 ... or/d6vtj45

"Now you have 2 entities with a lot of power over the network that benefit from it not scaling. However, people moving to other coins or a fork would give back power to the user, as ultimately bitcoin's value is dependent on the people that use it and not the people who run it." - btcnotworking

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Inflating transaction costs by artificially limiting transaction rates

"is a disaster" - jeanduluoz

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

it's BlockScheam's strategy to burden bitcoin with technical nonsense code so as to either destroy it

"or make it impossible to maintain as a btc fork..." - paulh697

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

Satoshi "handed the keys" to Gavin, then Gavin distributed it

"and was forced out of core devs" - DaSpawn

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

So the only entity as a whole that is for small blocks is Blockstream,

"It's a nightmare." - drawingthesun

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

It's the fact that the industry has actually found bitcoin lacking and has actually started looking elsewhere. If you're in denial about that, who's the ignorant one?

"These are people who are involved in business, that are watching the industry walk away. They understand what's going on outside of the code.

It's only the people that bury their heads in the code (and have little or no concern about the outside world) that think nothing is wrong and call everyone else stupid. " - BitttBurger

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

The people who are destroying Bitcoin are responsible for this: https://blockchain.info/unconfirmed-transactions

"They are also responsible for turning Bitcoin into a settlement system banks say they want (but in truth don't) vs. a payment system people want. They are responsible for promoting complicated solutions to simple problems, and marketing unproven technologies as ways to resolve easily addressable configuration issues. These people are responsible for making Bitcoin unpredictable and expensive." - p2pecash

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

What the fuck is the point of bitcoin then? Why dont you just buy gold bullion and stop fucking up bitcoin? Gold has failed to provide any meaningful competition to central banks precisely because government's find it easy to censor gold PAYMENTS.

"And as far as layer 2 goes. I wouldnt hold my breath. Nobody even knows if the fucking thing will work because you've wasted everyone's time for the last two years without even doing any modeling to see if it will work.

And since nobody else has bothered I've spent the last several days writing python scripts to model the likelihood that payments will find routes when values are taken into consideration.

Preliminary results seem to confirm my suspicion that a non-negligible number of transactions will fail to find routes. At least at medium and high values.

And it also seems to suggest that route failure increases as the network scales as it becomes uneconomical to increase the number of channels per node at the same rate of network growth." - Chris_Pacia

[iFixBTCmemoryIssues]

I paid 1$

"for a 21$ transaction" - rivierafrank

[adminRizvan]

mistake: the limit of sending messages in days is exceeded.

I use blockchain.
On an extent of 10 days, such mistake appears.
I can't enter a purse, and I can't dump (to otvenit) identification.
Support of blockchain is silent, ignores me.
I supports of blockchain, shocked by such irresponsible work.
Help somebody!!!

[LiteCoinGuy]

@iFixBTCmemoryIssues

alot of your posts are being flagged by other members of this forum as spam. until now i did not delete any of your posts...

maybe calm down a little bit. we know u hate core and love ethereum. repeating it again and again is not necessary.

[Fremont]

@iFixBTCmemoryIssues

alot of your posts are being flagged by other members of this forum as spam. until now i did not delete any of your posts...

maybe calm down a little bit. we know u hate core and love ethereum. repeating it again and again is not necessary.

!

Message from: Fremont

Please do not consider the above as an instruction of any sort, it's more so a request by the mod team to help cut down on the spam reports. We love to have you here, iFixBTCmemoryIssues, and you make a lot of very useful and helpful posts on the forum. Perhaps creating a larger post out of the content used for smaller, 10-word posts, might be something to consider? Whatever works for everybody - no instruction not to post! I should reiterate that freedom of speech is of the utmost importance to us here at Bitcoin.com, and it is on equal footing with promoting Bitcoin itself. If any poster ever feels like they are being censored by any member of the moderation team, please report this to another moderator and provide screenshots & links if possible. Also, please note that this does not conflict with the request in LiteCoinGuy's post above; it is meant to complement it and provide some clarification. As a moderator here LiteCoinGuy will use his own discretion to ascertain which posts may constitute spam - this is a responsibility shared by any moderator on any web forum. Cheers! Fremont

[mjglqw]

I think if you're intentions was to have a compilation of complaints from bitcoin users and NOT spam to have higher post count,
you would just edit your main post everytime and add the complaints there, instead of making a reply for every complaint.