You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Is Roger on mission to destroy his legacy?

in #bitcoin6 years ago

Here's the lowdown.

I wouldn't give a toss if BCH had gone off on their own, like so many other forks after, and just did their thing.

But no, it couldn't be that way - Roger Ver wouldn't LET it be that way.

From day one, it was all about usurping the Bitcoin name and mindshare - something no OTHER fork does - but Ver felt compelled to do it with BCH.

Why Is that? You'd have to ask. Its the tactics of underhanded con-men and cheats. Bring in the "mark", tell them they're getting something that they aren't, and watching the money tumble in.

Roger Ver has been insisting that BCH is Bitcoin. It is not. By the very virtue of having to fork, it can't be the same thing anymore. Ever.

So it strikes me as disingenuous when Ver cries "censorship" and rails against "core" (another Ver invention, by the way, labeling for us versus them purposes) while at the same time he does things like lists BCH up top on his site to buy "Bitcoin" when it clearly wasn't.

He changed it later when he was called out, but that kind of retraction doesn't happen often.

The simple truth is -- Roger Ver and his cabal of Cryptocurrency conspirators are selling a system, much like Amway or any other Multi-Level-Marketing operation, where THEY own the entire hashrate through Jihan's mining pools, and Roger runs the on-ramps (and now, he wants to run an exchange too.) and waves in newbies who don't know any better.

This is called fraud.

Roger knows it, and doesn't care.

He's even affirmed before that his whole purpose in creating BCH (In a few interviews he flops back and forth like BCH came out of "nowhere" and he was surprised to actually admitting he had a hand in it) and then he shrieks in surprise when everyone tells him he's full of shit.

He's worth millions, and this isn't about the money. Did you know that Roger Ver ran for Assemblyman in California?

Roger is a politician. And worse, he's the kind of smiling-to-your-face psychopath that wants power. He seeks it, and he wants it.

When the Bitcoin community didn't give him the proper accolades he thought he deserved, somewhere back in the early 2010's or so he decided to bring forth his own virtual platform, where everyone would have to come to him and his associates to get their transactions done.

This is simply a dictator-like lunge at the future of finance, and Roger doesn't care who gets trampled on while he climbs up the mountain of newbies he's duping to do it.

Roger has become the very thing that he says he hates -- and by doubling-down on this reckless and vendetta-driven crusade he's only going to end up destroying himself. (And a lot of people who didn't know any better.)

Somehow, I can't help but flash back to the video of Roger Ver imbuing Mt. Gox with his "brand" to assuage the newbies. We should've known then that anyone seeking power not only doesn't deserve it - but is honestly dangerous and corrupt.

Sort:  

I wouldn't give a toss if BCH had gone off on their own, like so many other forks after, and just did their thing.
(...)
Roger Ver has been insisting that BCH is Bitcoin. It is not. By the very virtue of having to fork, it can't be the same thing anymore. Ever.

What is Bitcoin, who defines what a Bitcoin is? The first question is (relatively) easy to answer, the second is more diffuse - but I believe eventually the super-majority of miners, exchanges and users decide - and they have clearly decided that BCH is not Bitcoin.

In my opinion there wasn't one fork on the 1st of August, there was two forks - and it could even have been three forks.

  • The SegWit2X fork: Introducing the SegWit patch, on a promise that there would be a doubling of the base block size limit some few month later. Deliberately made to be compatible with the UASF if miners would be quick enough to signal support for SegWit2X - which they did. The 2X-promise was later broken.

  • The UASF fork: A bitcoin user cult, much like the BCH cult, trying to break away from a majority of miners who didn't want SegWit. If it wasn't for SegWit2X, I firmly believe we'd have had a bitcoin with bigger blocks and without SegWit today, and the UASF-coin would have been the altcoin.

  • Bitcoin Cash: increasing the block size and including some parts of the SegWit patch.

I don't see any of those three being more "Bitcoin" than the other, from a pure technical point of view.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.15
TRX 0.15
JST 0.028
BTC 53778.84
ETH 2224.93
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.30