Positive aspects of THE BCH Bangkok Miners’ Meeting: communities get to know each other better

The original intention of the Bangkok Miners Conference was to bring together supporters of both Bitcoin SV and Bitcoin ABC nodes in a dispute to resolve the dispute in person or to put it behind them. This was originally an active and spontaneous offline activity of BCH community, and the event organizer invited almost all the key figures involved in the controversy, but the final result was not satisfactory for some reasons. As the content of the conference has not been disclosed in detail, this article gives a general review of the conference through the perspective of the conference participant [url=]Jonald Fyookball[/url]. Jonald Fyookball, developer of the BCH Wallet, had no interest in either party participating in the debate and was attending as a neutral third party. Jonald Fyookball’s article on Yours, titled “My Experience at the Bangkok Miners’ Conference”, is a long one, so this article has been appropriately edited without affecting the meaning of the original. I want to tell the story of events in Bangkok from my own point of view. I will try to report this from a neutral position, presenting facts rather than opinions. First of all, there were actually two incidents in the same city on the same day. My understanding is that the miners’ conference was first organized by Bitmain, ViaBTC and some other Chinese participants. I received an email about it and was invited to attend. The email said Craig Wright (nChain chief scientist and Bitcoin SV backer) and Calvin Ayre (CoinGeek mining pool founder), among others, would attend. A day or two after reading that email, I saw CoinGeek announce that they had also held their Bangkok conference at the W Hotel on the same day. I don’t know why there were two meetings. Anyway, a strange thing happened on the morning of the meeting. CoinGeek published an article noting that the meeting had taken place and that the miners unanimously supported “Satoshi’s vision.” (On the other hand, the ambiguity between the SV client and Satoshi’s vision is confusing). The odd thing about the CoinGeek article is the timing. It was posted around 8am local time in Bangkok, so the meeting at the W hotel actually took place the day before, or there may be some other explanation. In the actual conference miners: almost all the major mineral pools to attend, about 50 people, including Antpool, viabtc, BTC.com, Rawpool, Bitcoin.com, etc. ABC,BU,XT,Bitprim and nChain, as well as several other prominent ecosystem players, all had developers present. The conference agenda includes a preliminary discussion of nChain, Bitcoin ABC, and BU, followed by a coffee break, a Q&A session, lunch, and then a discussion. All 3 speeches were good; NChain’s presentation said we need Bitcoin to be “secure, stable and scalable.” ABC’s talk discussed bitcoin Cash’s past, present, and future, and detailed their plans to overcome bottlenecks of scale. BU talks about the “good, bad and ugly” of split ends. The nChain talk described the “why” and the ABC described the “how”, and the two talks gave the impression that they were on the same side, except perhaps for Dr. Wright, who left after the nChain talk and did not stay to listen to Bitcoin ABC or BU. After coffee, Dr. Wright came back. The Q&A session began, and the first question (which I asked myself) was for Bitcoin ABC, asking what would be wrong with removing the cap entirely, as some had suggested. In response to this question, When ABC developer Shammah Chancellor spoke, Dr Wright suddenly decided to leave the meeting, calling it “lies and nonsense!” Shortly after he left, he posted a series of tweets and began an impromptu interview in the hotel lobby, which I believe was on YouTube. To be honest, I can’t remember the rest of the answer because the distraction was distracting, although other nChain representatives denied ABC’s answer was “nonsense”. After lunch, Yang haibo introduced the formation of an organization to help the development of BCH. On the second day of the conference, Jimmy from nChain said the conference organizers had originally planned a day, which is why not everyone could attend the event on the second day. Dr. Wright was absent from the meeting the next day. Overall, the second day of the meeting was unproductive. A number of topics were proposed in order to try to discuss important issues, and unfortunately nearly two hours were spent discussing soft caps versus hard caps and theoretical caps, which I thought was a waste of time. I strongly encourage others to use our limited time to discuss what I think is the most important issue, which is to reach agreement on what will actually happen in the November upgrade. NChain said it objected to the ABC roadmap, but they did not explain why. NChain could not dispute that OP_CHECKDATASIG had not been adequately investigated, or that those who could explain were not present, and dealt with CTOR in a similar manner. Many developers and miners said at the start of the conference that they really want the blockchain to fork or the community to split. But, confusingly, the issues that need to be discussed are not being addressed. With few attempts at compromise, I suggested to nChain if they would be willing to accept some ABC changes if their operating code could be given more priority, and the answer was “no”. Some on the nChain side have suggested that we should delay the November fork upgrade to avoid blockchain fragmentation, others disagree, arguing that the upgrade should not be denied on grounds of controversy, and that the fork must be implemented anyway as SIGHASH replay protection is already in place. I felt the trip was a bit of a waste of time, but one very positive aspect of the conference was that the community was getting to know each other, especially miners and developers; Everyone can see where everyone else is coming from and that’s a very important thing for them. I love meeting people I’ve never met before, like Steve Shadders from nChain and Jason Cox from Bitcoin ABC. Everyone (with the exception of Dr. Wright) was very professional and gracious. Roger Ver was in attendance, and I was happy to see his outspoken performance, even offering a $100,000 reward to anyone who could identify security vulnerabilities in ABC roadmap. Unfortunately, Calvin Ayre didn’t make it. I think a successful compromise or agreement is more likely to come to him. At the very least, it would be good to be able to see the wider ecosystem in this context. (Original link: www.yours.org/content/my-…