You have a very loose definition of “invalid.” Inaction is NOT invalid. Many users/nodes around the world would have faced wipeout risk, just because they were unaware of the UASF chain.
1/ Again, there are so many problems with the so called “user polls”. For examples:
-
-
2/ Confirmation bias: those who follow you tend to agree with you - note that even if an independent party started the poll it can quickly turn biased as soon as one influencer with large following retweets.
-
3/ Sampling bias: does r/Bitcoin and Twitter crypto truly represent the collective will of all Bitcoin users? Chances are the answer is no.
-
4/ Even if there is a way to ask every Bitcoin user, would that necessarily produce a good poll? the truth is that most users are not qualified to make technical judgements. Do we poll users on how to build bridges / nuclear generators?
-
5/ Many were just frustrated / impatient with the stalemate and willing to go with the 1st solution you give them, whatever that might be. Otoh, a number of Core Devs- who actually understood the full implications of BIP148- were on the fence about BIP148.https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6ef7wb/some_comments_on_the_bip148_uasf_from_the/ …
-
6/ The author of BIP148 himself, ShaolinFry, had second thoughts about BIP148. It was exactly what prompted him to create BIP149- a safer alternative.
-
7/ Speaking of which, the fact that there were multiple Core Devs against merging BIP148 to Core was clear evidence that your statement “support for BIP148 == support for Segwit” is not true. Unless you are saying Core Devs are not part of the “community.”
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
