Barry Silbert’s SegWit agreement is already mired in controversy amid confusion as to how to proceed and criticism from Roger Ver.
The meeting at Consensus 2017 Monday generated much hype, but just two days later the roadmap its participants agreed already has its detractors.
Hard fork first?
Chief among these is Ver, whose comments Tuesday appear to contradict Bitcoin.com’s place among Silbert’s signees.
Bitcoin Unlimited proponent Roger Ver wrote in a Reddit thread:
“I wasn't there in person, but my understanding is that the two MB hard fork must come first. SegWit only activates if it gets 80 percent hash rate support.”
His version of the roadmap is furthermore the opposite way around to that detailed in an official summary of the meeting by Silbert’s Digital Currency Group, as well as in a circular to the Core mailing list.
“FrankenSegWit” criticized
Major criticism also came today from MIT’s Jeremy Rubin, who released a 30-point list of reasons why Silbert’s idea was “flawed.”
Other less than supportive reactions came from core developers Greg Maxwell and Eric Lombrozo. While the former referred to the plan as “FrankenSegWit,” Lombrozo in a series of tweets mentioned he had not attended Silbert’s meeting as he was against a closed-door agreement.
“I was invited to that meeting but gave a precondition that nothing is to be signed and no decisions on consensus rules are to be made,” he wrote, adding that he “was not taken up on that offer.”
@s1yz0r I was invited to that meeting but gave as a precondition that nothing is to be signed and no decisions on consensus rules are to be made.
— Eric Lombrozo (@eric_lombrozo) May 24, 2017
Elsewhere, the roadmap is even attracting ridicule, with the meeting being compared to a similar pseudo-agreement reached by members of a Roundtable in Hong Kong in February 2016.
