RE: Tone Vays vs Roger Ver debate on BTC vs BCH as 'hard currency'.
Obviously not the better of debates. It got heated right off the bat from the actual debate with Jimmy previously, in which Jimmy had crowned himself moderator and had an entire speech pre-written out of the blue.
(edit: I just noticed now that Jimmy blocked me on Medium for criticizing his full speech that he posted afterwards)
But if you ignore the fact that one guy (Roger as usual) is significantly louder than the other and you listen to what is said some things will no doubt stick out if you've been around for this debate up until now.
Tone is not a Bitcoin design maximalist per se, he is a HODLer/noforks maximalist. Roger is a crazy ancap and ready to switch coins if one doesn't work out. The former doesn't think competitive scaling is a good idea. The latter still thinks Bitcoin can scale through industry consolidation and professionalism.
Whoever you agree with, that gives you a clue.
Holding you savings in bitcoin is what every Bitcoin maximalist does. . Noforks maximalist? What does that even mean?
Bitcoin is what Satoshi described via posts and whitepaper. This hasn't changed, but what most people know as Bitcoin certainly has.
Holding your savings in it doesn't make you a maximalist. That's as much a shortcut as saying anything different to what people know as Bitcoin is an altcoin. That's not what the concept did or should refer to.
Tone is against hard forks period and even more vocally against "contentious" forks, which is a strange concept considering there is always going to be some contention to any fork.
Bitcoin is not about popular opinion or "one node one vote" or anything like that. This is what he and so many others either don't get, or more likely just don't want to admit at this point.
I'll tell you right off, Your comment is uninfomed mental masturbation.
That means a lot coming from you.