๊ฐ€์ž… ํ›„ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋งํฌ๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๋ฉด ๋™์˜์ƒ ์žฌ์ƒ ๋ฐ ์ดˆ๋Œ€ ๋ณด์ƒ์„ ๋ฐ›์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์Šต๋‹ˆ๋‹ค.

_Checkmate ๐ŸŸ ๐Ÿ”‘โšกโ˜ข๏ธ๐Ÿ›ข๏ธ
@_Checkmatey_
Helping navigate #Bitcoin#'s volatility Newsletter Onchain Analyst @_checkonchain Charting Suite
๊ฐ€์ž… January 2018
1.4K ํŒ”๋กœ์ž‰ ์ค‘    131.8K ํŒฌ
Your proposed fork didn't achieve rough consensus. Instead of reflecting on why your proposal failed, you blame the referee, and the rules of the game, claiming a shady cabal has designed them to work against you. You wanted to play chess by reverting the two pawn moves forward rule. The majority signalled that they did not want to play with those rules. The obvious result is nobody outside your little clique sat down to play your version. The problem isn't with the existing rules of chess, nor those who currently enjoy playing by them. The problem is that your proposal for changed rules was unappealing, and the attempt to force feed it to us didn't land...at all. The new plan seems to be forking into some mutant form of checkers. Best of luck with that.
๋” ๋ณด๊ธฐ