I don't think anyone is going to fork, Attila is just trying to better understand the promotion of 0-satoshi tokenization. Same for me.
I think it's probably appropriate to continue the discussion, and get everyone feeling warm and smarmy. There's a solution to this, one way or the other.
I think the solution is Nodes shouldn't promote 0-satoshi tokenization, nor FALSE RETURN as "immutable ledger". It's not that I think FALSE RETURN doesn't have a purpose, its that marketing is important or things like Nodes can go off the rails.
Thankfully, Attila is defaulting conservative. He's saying HIS node won't support 0-sats. That won't hurt ANYONE.
Unless missing something, I think his thinking might be closer to ideal. But that said, I don't think he'd be willing to fork over it, instead, just leave the system if it's dying (bc there's some truth to his concerns).
I don't think anyone is going to fork, Attila is just trying to better understand the promotion of 0-satoshi tokenization. Same for me.
I think it's probably appropriate to continue the discussion, and get everyone feeling warm and smarmy. There's a solution to this, one way or the other.
I think the solution is Nodes shouldn't promote 0-satoshi tokenization, nor FALSE RETURN as "immutable ledger". It's not that I think FALSE RETURN doesn't have a purpose, its that marketing is important or things like Nodes can go off the rails.
Thankfully, Attila is defaulting conservative. He's saying HIS node won't support 0-sats. That won't hurt ANYONE.
Unless missing something, I think his thinking might be closer to ideal. But that said, I don't think he'd be willing to fork over it, instead, just leave the system if it's dying (bc there's some truth to his concerns).