Everyone says that it is good for BCH, but who is truly loyal - how to evaluate the quarrel of the digital currency community

FMZ

Chapter 0 Introduction

An encrypted digital currency community never stops quarreling. Why do so many people tirelessly waste time quarreling in social networks instead of voting directly?

This article analyzes the performance and strength of parties in quarrels in BCH community. I want to know who is sincere and who is loyal to BCH.

Chapter 1 Voting with your feet and voting with your mouth

Encrypting digital currency and blockchain technology as a very new area can't avoid disagreements among participants, who often put time, energy, reputation and money. Where there are disagreements, there are quarrels; and there will be more quarrels when there is input, especially in a bear market. In this situation, participants can vote with their feet namely leaving the community directly, or vote with mouth, namely quarreling every day and trying to convince everyone to follow your idea.

Voting with feet means leaving the community completely, such as selling the coins, or simply treating the coins as dead, withdrawing your business from the currency, and no longer participating in any activity or discussion of the currency.

The “voting with mouth” described in this article is only a metaphor. It does not only mean “speaking and expressing opinions”, etc., but all forces that can influence the development of this currency, including: continue to develop on this currency, such as writing code, making products; continue to operate your own business, such as mining; continue to voice, such as writing articles; continue to participate in activities and meetings, and so on.

Voting with your feet is a very simple economic act that directly cuts off everything you have and the coin. The exit action does not cause any conflict with other people in this community. Exiting itself is also a way of expressing opinion. For the free market, exit is a piece of data that is part of the invisible hand of the free market, a powerful way to express opinions, and it cannot be underestimated.

Voting with your mouth involves more activities such as economics and politics, which may cause conflicts between people. Voting with mouth is an initiative to express opinions in an attempt to influence others. This is a way of actively participating in the game, and often turns into a fierce quarrel and economic game.

But these two expressions are not so black or white, there is a very vague zone between them in where can you see who is really in love with this coin. FMZ

Chapter 2 Classification of Voting

Even voting with feet and voting with mouth get the same result, there is different effect because of the different backgrounds of the decision-makers.

In the first case, it is very simple for decision makers to vote with their feet, without any cost and without any restrictions.

For example, a merchant using a digital currency can use BTC or BCH, and the cost of switching is almost zero. If the BCH becomes worse, the merchant will not scream in his peer group. He can just change into another one, or even accept the payment of multiple coins. This type of person, when faced with differences, the biggest possibility is to vote with feet, and then leave a word, "stupid."

For miners, the mining algorithms for BTC and BCH are the same, so the cost of miners exiting any of BTC and BCH is negligible, and they just join another one.

Now the competition for encrypting digital currencies is very fierce, for there are potential alternatives to the economic and ecological nodes. Most exchanges are like this, and developers can vote at almost zero cost.

In the second case, the cost of voting with month in the community is low, and everyone can express freely without speech management. With such a background, the behavior of voting with feet may be reduced.

Anyone who encounters something that they are dissatisfied with, the first reaction must be to make a sound first, to see if it can cause change. If it doesn’t work, then consider whether to quit. The cost and the influence of expression will affect the ways of voting. Some people have influence and they have money to participate in various lobbying and meetings. It is even easier for them to vote with their mouths.

Many centralized digital currencies have high vocal costs. Ordinary users can only express dissatisfaction in the chatting group and will be kicked if they are not careful. This type of user often votes directly with feet. During the 2016 and 2017 Bitcoin expansion disputes, there was a lot of speech control where the speech is concentrated. Now the BCH community is a decentralized and the speech is very loose, and everyone can make complaints.

The third case is that if you don't get any feedback, you will increase the probability of exit.

In 2017, the bitcoin expansion dispute split into the BCH. The supporters of the expansion made every effort to express their views, but useless, no one care. Finally, they had to withdraw from the BTC and form a BCH.

If a digital currency has a large group of voice that has not been valued, it is very likely that the voice will exit, and split. FMZ

In the fourth case, the community encourages voting with feet, or influential people in the community encourage different opinions to split, thus reducing the quarrel.

Now there are many such voices in the BCH community. You disagree with my approach, you can leave. CSW and its supporters receive a large number of accusations of splitting out.

The fifth situation is that it is not allowed to vote with feet, only to quarrel on the same boat.

At present, the CCH, nChain, coingeek and SBI of the BCH community are required to do so. They are not allowed to split. Let's die and live on a chain.

Chapter 3 Who has more sincerity? FMZ

The question we are asking now is which situation is for a healthy community, and when these situations occur, what to do is more respectable. We can judge their loyalty to this currency through what they doing in these situations (voting with feet or voting with mouth).

We must first define what loyalty means. Loyalty is believing the community in which we live, even it makes mistakes but will eventually return to the right, and insisting on voting with mouth to help the community return to the right path.

Reasonable loyalty is that you can vote with feet but choose to vote with mouth, hoping to bring changes, and they do not abuse freedom of speech and will not use force to intimidate dissidents to vote with their feet.

In the first case, voting with feet is zero cost. If the economic and ecological nodes of a coin can be voted at zero costl, it is certainly unhealthy. This community can only be maintained by feelings.

Even so, someone insist on voting with mouths, they are loyal. For example, in the current dispute of BCH, the cost of voting with feet of the pool and miners is very low and almost negligible. But many of them insist on voting with mouths. These people have sincerity and they are loyal to BCH.

Like last week's Bangkok meeting, many mining pools and miners attended and insisted on voting with their mouths to participate in the construction of the BCH community, which is worth approving. At this Bangkok meeting, there were a small number of exchanges attending, and they were also loyal to BCH.

In the second case, voting with mouth is free. This is what any community should pursue, and the background is a healthy one. But this background has a negative effect, that is, the parties often talk nonsense, and even launch malicious attacks on other people and projects.

This is what happens in BCH community. The BCH is indeed free speech, but there is a lot of war of words on social media. Those who abuse freedom of speech are disloyal.

In the third case, the community allows voting with mouth, but a large number of people actually get no feedback after speaking, which is fact that there are people like these in any community.

But if someone doesn't have much feedback, but still insists on voting with their mouths instead of choosing to vote with their feet, then these people are loyal.

In the fourth case, voting with feet is encouraged. This is unhealthy for the community, because the split will inevitably weaken the overall influence. Such people are not loyal.

In the fifth case, voting with feet is not allowed. This is more unfavorable to the community. In fact, this is the most powerful vote with your mouth. This means that you must listen to me, otherwise I will. . . . . . Such people are not loyal.

For currency holders, merchants, miners, mining pools, developers, etc., who is right in the debate?

Chapter 4 Conclusion

There seems to be no community that neither votes with feet nor votes with mouth.

FMZ