That said I think you may have thought I was arguing on the 110 side somehow. I'm very much not. Unlike spam, it's actually a threat to Bitcoin.
your last paragraph is how I also understood bitcoin-- the distributing of trust was such that there was no risk of us being able to collude to change it.
I like your framing of how "no counterparty risk turns into not knowing what small group becomes the risky counterparty you have to worry about". The concern you are makes Bip110 sound a bit like an insurgency.
and I know you were not arguing on the Bip110 side...
However, for your stated concerns of "Are my transactions permanent? Is 21 million a cap? Is a presigned transaction I make today ever going to be able to be broadcast" -- i believe those are sacred planks of both factions? so you don't have anything to worry about...
I like your framing of how "no counterparty risk turns into not knowing what small group becomes the risky counterparty you have to worry about". The concern you are makes Bip110 sound a bit like an insurgency.
and I know you were not arguing on the Bip110 side...
However, for your stated concerns of "Are my transactions permanent? Is 21 million a cap? Is a presigned transaction I make today ever going to be able to be broadcast" -- i believe those are sacred planks of both factions? so you don't have anything to worry about...