Afterthoughts from the BCH 2020 November fork with Amaury Séchet
Tags: Cryptocurrency, Bitcoin Cash, Bcha

Afterthoughts from the BCH 2020 November fork with Amaury Séchet kilRcola Jan 2·4 min read

We have a new day and our own fork BCHA with no one holding us back. (Credit Pexels)

Recently I spoke with Amaury about his feelings during the fork, after the fork, and his hopes for the future for the unknown and yet to be rebranded BCHA chain.

ABC Developers Amaury Séchet and Antony Zegers. Photo taken by: Kilrcola

Q: Amaury, how did it make you feel watching all the events unfold in the lead up to the November 15 fork, in particular those who said they supported the IFP and backed down due to pressure from the ‘community’?

AS: First and foremost, they will be the first victims of this choice. They will not be allowed back into the inner circles and will be replaced in time. It is a missed opportunity for us and them, but ultimately, people are free to make their own choices.

Q: In the tense few days leading up to the fork, it seemed there was majority support coming out for BCHN, but no one could really tell what was going to happen. Regardless of that, do you still think the network split was inevitable and this was the right path forward?

AS: The network split was inevitable. People funding BCHN, such as Marc De Mesel, did state — way before any of the stated reasons for the split existed — that he was gearing up and ready to fund a split.

Q: Focusing on the future, now BCHA has its own chain, what is the primary focus in terms of scaling BCHA to become the best P2P cash for the world in 2021?

AS: The most important item now is to make sure there are good basics for the ecosystem and that Avalanche is deployed. Fortunately, the lack of contention is allowing things to move forward at a much faster pace than it used to.

Q: BCHA was under attack from the start by some miners that were not acting in their own best interest and following the incentives of Bitcoin, can you give any comment on how we can avoid these types of attacks in the future?

AS: With the deployment of Avalanche, this will soon be a worry of the past. What I read in these attacks is an admission of the inability of the BCHN leadership to create value, and therefore the need to destroy alternative value. This is a losing strategy — and market movements are reflecting this. This is also a message to the BCHN community to submit or be destroyed. It is certainly worrying, but most people in the BCHN community seem to be oblivious to this. If nothing, this was a great demonstration of why it was necessary to leave a community with toxic leadership.

Q: In regards to the attack as outlined above, is it clear there are ‘other’ — and also potentially ‘state actors’ — that do not want to see BCHA, with its new coinbase-incentive ruleset, succeed?

AS: It is fairly obvious who these people are. I do not think that they are state actors, but some might be. If a state actor wanted to derail the project, they’d have simpler ways to do it. And governments tend to not be very competent, so this is what they would have gone for.

Q: Many people are asking about the rebrand, obviously it needs to be done correctly with all the technical bases covered. When do you expect it to become live?

AS: We ran into a few issues with the rebrand. It is unclear what needs to happen now. Maybe simply choosing the ABC ticker is the right path forward.

Q: Have you got any extra comments for the BCHA followers out there?