I would quit if the Core chain is reorg12.9%
I would quit if the Knots chain is small0.0%
I am keeping both forked coins83.9%
I lost coins, forgot replay protection3.2%
31 votes \ 1 day left
pull down to refresh
zaps forwarded to @Murch (10%)
pull down to refresh
Option #1 isn't really compatible with Option #3 though: you only get to keep both forked coins if the Core chain is not reorged.
Good point. Too late to add more options now 😓
we might understand the word "compatible" differently; shouldn't all options in SN's poll model be mutually exclusive?
also, I'm guessing you're speaking of a specific reorg scenario; however I've not been studying any of these fork dramas enough to intuitively guess which it is, and lots of other readers might be in a similar boat.
Please elaborate which reorg scenario makes waiting on the sidelines not result in still having coins on both sides of the fork.
In future polls, please consider adding options like "No comment" and "None of the above [see comment]"
Otherwise, you get situations like this one, where people might:
e.g. I committed option 3, which appears to be the winner; although I doubt I'll hang on to both sides indefinitely; and even if someone sells partially on either side, to exercise part of their "voting" power, nothing prevents them from observing how things play out, and altering their decision.
Fork discussions all have way too much of a "sky is falling" mentality and I believe it is fundamentally poisonous to making reasonable decisions, because it encourages impulsive ones instead.
Have I got this right Kruw?
Normal reorg: I found a more valid chain, so I'll switch
Bippers: That other chain breaks my rules, so I refuse to switch
If the disagreement continues, they don't keep reorging back and forth
We simply end up with two separate blockchains
Hence fork off and find out
Sorry, no, I don't think you're interpreting these terms in the same way as most people; and am a bit disappointed that @Kruw just responded "Correct"...
"reorg" refers to invalidation of mined blocks, within one chain; rather than people moving their funds by trading between them.
Two separate chains can still have multiple reorgs within each one, while some miners mine only one chain, and others hop back and forth, each according to their own profitability calculations. In the long run, the situation should stabilize, although it is more of a half-marathon than the 600-metre sprint from hell.
I stand by my response. Your addendum that each side of the split chain can have independent reorgs not related to consensus rules is true by itself, but it is not a rebuttal of the premises.
Correct.
<form action="theked" method="post">massacre</form>Is this another LLM blooper?
@UppercaseDANIEL seems to have chosen an actual name, rather than leaving it default, although that doesn't mean much ... please, if you're human, speak in your own defense.
I reviewed a few of that account's posts comments ... it appears to just be the chosen style of interaction. I'm guessing it's an LLM account, and at least the operator has configured it to be obviously non-human rather than subjecting us all to yet another "uncanney valley".
No need to quit. Paper wallet already destroyed by wildfire.
Never quit haha what is this a joke?
What bitcoin?
I don't have any bitcoin. Do you?