At least two Reddit threads have sprung up in the last 24 hours deliberating on the idea of calling for a Bitcoin Classic following the Ethereum Classic split from Ethereum.
“If ETHc can apparently sustain itself against ETH, Bitcoin classic/unlimited/xt can definitely sustain itself against core. It’s been years of whining on the sidelines waiting for miners to act and come to our side. Let’s just do it!”
It generated mixed comments as well as the second thread Now Let's Create Bitcoin Classic (big block support), led by Gavin, It will be $3B market cap immediately whose OP Bitnicity says:
“Guys, Ethereum hard fork opens our eyes to new solutions and the possibility to the Bitcoin deadlock, let's hard fork to Bitcoin Classic. I bet exchanges, miners (they are greedy anyway) will jump in and it will immediately shoot to $3B marketcap. Free money grab for everyone and it resolves all Bitcoin deadlock. Win-Win.”
While some of the group members sought to clarify that Ethereum is the forked while Ethereum Classic continues to mine the original unchanged Blockchain, others raised several technical issues as part of their consideration to justify their stance in support of, or against the proposed move.
caveden says the call has been going on for a while. https://m.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/46rgd9/an_important_message_to_the_main_Wallets
Noosterdam suggested that there would be a need to change the PoW algorithm to enforce the fork which entails friction and requires that “a substantial number of people judge that deadweight loss due to 1MB is greater than that friction.” The writer says this should be “somewhat soonish, assuming Core doesn't make a move in the meantime.”
DanielWilc who claims to be a small blocker thinks there is nothing wrong with the fork as a right just as core devs too have the right not to promote or run or write hard-fork code.
But BitcoinFuturist replied:
“Difficulty algorithm is different in Bitcoin so what works for Ethereum will not work for Bitcoin. Also, it is yet to be seen that ETHC can survive. I'd put money on it being both 51% attacked and also have its price driven into the ground within the next 2 weeks. Exactly the same as would happen to a Bitcoin minority fork. It is simply not worth forking without the majority of miners and users on board.”
Capt_Roger_Murdock added that the idea is ill-advised and urged the group to consider that the differences which led to the fork with ETHc / ETH were truly ‘irreconcilable’ as the dispute over whether to roll back those transactions couldn't be deferred. The writer stated:
“People have been pointing out that we'd need to raise the block size limit for years, but the 1-MB limit has only started to actually matter over the last few months as transactional demand has finally started to butt up against it. But it's still probably not doing that much damage. So I think patience is still in order. I agree with /u/ydtm's assessment when he says:
I think the Berlin Wall Principle will end up applying to Blockstream as well: (1) The Berlin Wall took longer than everyone expected to come tumbling down. (2) When it did finally come tumbling down, it happened faster than anyone expected (ie, in a matter of days) - and everyone was shocked.”
trancephorm concluded that ETC is going down the drain or become obscured as a coin with a very low market cap which is not much related to the BTC case. The writer says a HF may work if they could reach say 30% with Classic.