Please proceed with the UASF, the New York Agreement has too many caveats.

  1. The New York Agreement requires 80% signalling, which seems unlikely to happen
  2. Miners stated they will support it if its technologically mature, but in its current form it is rushed and poorly reviewed/tested
  3. Miners said they will support it if its deployed by the community, but that is unlikely to happen for reason no. 2

Its as if The New York agreement is intended to fail and keep the status quo, where as BIP148 is better since all it needs is 20% hashrate which is more realistic.

Submitted June 17, 2017 at 05:14PM by dontthrowbtc
via reddit