A few days ago, Luke Dashjr, Bitcoin Core Developer and member of the founding team of Blockstream announced a proposal for a soft fork of Bitcoin blockchain that caused a lot of controversies not only in the developer community but also among crypto enthusiasts worldwide.
According to an article published by our partner site Ethereum World News, Luke DAshjr intends to avoid the accelerated expansion of the blockchain volume in order to encourage users to synchronize a higher number of nodes, promoting decentralization and security of the chain.
This implementation would not be permanent. The reduction would last until the end of this year. However, the immediate benefit of this measure would have a positive impact on the miners, harming the rest of the users who would have to pay higher fees to confirm their transactions, generating possible congestion in the network.
So much was the commotion caused by the proposal that even members of other communities issued their opinions on the matter. One of the communities that ventured to provide important critics and analysis is that of BCH, the most important altcoin born from a hard fork of Bitcoin in 2017.
Roger Ver and BCH: Reducing Blocks is Crazy and Could Kill BTC
Roger Ver, a well-known Shiller of this altcoin mentioned that he does not agree with Luke DashJr’s. It should be noted that precisely one of the main features of BCH is that it offers larger blocks despite having a much lower number of transactions recorded.
In a live stream, Roger Ver said he was not comfortable with the measure, and in case the community agreed to implement such a limitation, he wouldn’t hesitate in causing them damage by selling an important part of his holdings or even all his BTC.
“I really really hope that Luke Jr. and all these other guys lower the BTC block size to 300 kilobytes if they do I will sell even more of my BTC. A lot more. Maybe, I would even sell all of it at that point. Absolute Insanity.”
Another influencer who openly criticized this protest was Cobra, founder of Bitcointalk and Bitcoin.org. In response to John Carvalho, he explained that the idea was crazy according to his point of view and that if implemented, it could seriously hurt the community, lowering adoption levels. Something that could be terrible, especially in a year as crucial as this:
Stop this madness! Last thing Bitcoin needs is yet more contentious forks in this key year for adoption! A soft fork to "reduce the block size" is a hard fork in all but name. This will split off from the established consensus, cause massive drama, and damage trust in Bitcoin. https://t.co/54tzz4UIli
— Cøbra (@CobraBitcoin) February 11, 2019