Talk:List of Bitcoin splits - Revision history

Taras at 21:22, 31 December 2017

2017-12-31T21:22:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:22, 31 December 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:

	[[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)		[[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

			: Since everyone seems to be calling them forks right now, leading to confusion with code forks, chain forks, soft forks, hard forks, and dinner forks, what if we just make something up and hope it catches on? Like, branch-offs, or disbursements, or something. I do think that these "splits" should be classified separately from hard forks/chain forks, given both them and the original chain have, since the split, created spendable coinbases. [[User:Taras\|Taras]] ([[User talk:Taras\|talk]]) 21:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

	For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.		For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.

Nullius: Force TOC to enable seeing discussion topics at a glance from the top of the page.

2017-12-30T20:15:16Z

Force TOC to enable seeing discussion topics at a glance from the top of the page.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:15, 30 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
			__FORCETOC__

	== Titling this page ==		== Titling this page ==

Nullius: /* History of contentious hardforks */ new section

2017-12-30T20:07:51Z

History of contentious hardforks: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:07, 30 December 2017
Line 15:		Line 15:

	:Bitcoin itself [https://medium.com/@lukeparker/the-trust-attack-a6241a08a9cd ''is'' harmed] by these “splits”. Whereas “airdrop” is a positive, promotional word, which plays to people’s greed for free money. That’s probably the second-worst possible way to present the matter—other than outright fraudulently implying that Bitcoin Plutonium XT With Ponies be somehow The New Bitcoin. — [[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)		:Bitcoin itself [https://medium.com/@lukeparker/the-trust-attack-a6241a08a9cd ''is'' harmed] by these “splits”. Whereas “airdrop” is a positive, promotional word, which plays to people’s greed for free money. That’s probably the second-worst possible way to present the matter—other than outright fraudulently implying that Bitcoin Plutonium XT With Ponies be somehow The New Bitcoin. — [[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

			== History of contentious hardforks ==

			If there is to be such a page, it needs a reasonably complete history of all significant forks and attempted forks since ''circa'' 2015: XT, Unlimited, Classic, etc. Those new to Bitcoin usually have no knowledge of the history here. Whereas even a modicum thereof inevitably produces a sense of ''déjà vu'', for example when reading: [https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/computing/networks/the-bitcoin-for-is-a-coup “Adam Back Says the Bitcoin Fork Is a Coup”], Morgan Peck, IEEE ''Spectrum'', 19 August '''2015'''. Or any other myriad news articles, blog entries, or ml/forum flamewars from so recently as 2–3 years ago.

			I may work on this sometime; but at present, it would be low on my priorities list. — [[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User_talk:Nullius\|talk]] \| [[Special:Contributions/Nullius\|contribs]]) 20:07, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Nullius: /* Titling this page */ Reply to Belcher

2017-12-30T19:54:35Z

Titling this page: Reply to Belcher

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:54, 30 December 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.		For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.
	[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)		[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

			:Bitcoin itself [https://medium.com/@lukeparker/the-trust-attack-a6241a08a9cd ''is'' harmed] by these “splits”. Whereas “airdrop” is a positive, promotional word, which plays to people’s greed for free money. That’s probably the second-worst possible way to present the matter—other than outright fraudulently implying that Bitcoin Plutonium XT With Ponies be somehow The New Bitcoin. — [[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Nullius: Moved Belcher’s earlier comment under the topic, “Titling this page”.

2017-12-30T19:45:20Z

Moved Belcher’s earlier comment under the topic, “Titling this page”.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:45, 30 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.~~
	~~[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)~~

	== Titling this page ==		== Titling this page ==

Line 13:		Line 10:

	[[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)		[[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

			For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.
			[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Nullius: /* Titling this page */ new section

2017-12-30T19:43:34Z

Titling this page: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 30 December 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.		For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.
	[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)		[[User:Belcher\|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher\|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

			== Titling this page ==

			In reply to the edit log on creation: “Temporary title used - anyone have a better idea?”

			The word “splits” may confuse users who are familiar with the stock markets. It is a neutral, or even positive word; moreover, this makes it sound as if Bitcoin itself has split, with each holder of Bitcoin receiving a multiplier of bitcoins upon their previous balance. In the event of a stock split, the value held does not change; and the split stocks are fully equal and interchangeable with each other. Of course, these concepts are all wholly incorrect in application to these Bitcoin forks. Holders of Bitcoin ''may'' receive fork coins commensurate to their bitcoin balances.

			”List of Bitcoin clones” might be better. Or “contentious hardforks”. Or “scams”, though that’s too general for a page title. “Fork” seeks to be the word in most common use, thus most likely the title which would be found by those seeking information; though this word is also overloaded, and has its own problems.

			I think it is most important that the title must convey that the split/cloned/forked coins ''are not Bitcoin'', and not interchangeable with bitcoins. (Try sending Bitcoin to a BCH address for proof.)

			[[User:Nullius\|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius\|talk]]) 19:43, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Belcher: Created page with "For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed. ~~~~"

2017-12-09T01:34:36Z

Created page with "For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed. ~~~~"

New page

For the name I suggest "list of bitcoin airdrops". "Splits" implies that bitcoin itself was somehow harmed.
[[User:Belcher|Belcher]] ([[User talk:Belcher|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2017 (UTC)