I always shoot the ball away just to spite people <| sep |> Alex confirmed it in a tweet after Morgan said this too <| sep |> Says it won ' t arrive until the 6 th of December . <| sep |> I got him ! !!!!! Holy fuck I got him . On my third summon . So fucking stoked . What a great thanksgiving eve lol <| sep |> I think it changed when fairy was introduced , but azurill used to change from pure normal to pure water as marill <| sep |> Yep , going on tall even . <| sep |> I heard Miley Cyrus is pretty good she ' s not <| sep |> Meme if true <| sep |> gt They do and by a large amount , I always had more upload data than download running my nodes . Otherwise it would be impossible to sync new nodes . Data has to come from somewhere . Sorry I just cannot understand why you would say this . This point has nothing to do with the issue . Normally when having these discussions , it feels like each response both doesn ' t follow from the previous point and is also false . I am sure you feel the same way and this comment is no exception . However , I am sorry to be rude , but with you , this same thing even happens when we are talking about irrelevant issues , that have nothing to do with scaling , blocksizes or hardforks . I know it can be very difficult to hear , but this makes me somewhat suspicious . All I was saying is most full nodes probably do not upload anything Why does your node matter here ? This simply incorrect . I corrected you . Nodes upload lots of data . Node that simply don ' t upload any block or transactions would be a nonconsensus rules change that would simply destroy Bitcoin . gt My point is bitcoin rely on lot ' s of rules to work many are criticals . Not only the one needed to produce a valid block . Yes great . Again , so what ? This is just not relevant to our discussion . It is . Your point was change that doesn ' t affect consensus rules are not important . My response is Bitcoin rely on many nonconsensus rules and they are criticals for Bitcoin to work reliably . gt Any group of miner that wanted to force segwit activation can do by orphaning any block that doesn ' t vote for segwit or any soft or hard fork BTW . The lowest threshold for this to be possibe is 51 %. This Nakamoto consensus . Again this is changing the subject . So what that 51 % can do that attack ? This is not what we were talking aboutYes we did we talked about activation threshold . Orphaning block that vote against you are very relevant to activation threshold . gt Any chance you have a link , otherwise I call it bullshitI have provided JL ' s on this forum many times . Well could not find anything , so I call bullshit on that one .