> You claimed that Namecoin was "properly decentralised" and "uses blockchain to control ownership of domains and zone edits in a more secure way". Yeah, all 28 domains in use.
Yes that was my argument, we are both in agreement why are you so upset?
I'm not at all upset (and you're projecting again) -- I'm being sarcastic, and it whooshed right over your head. Look up: All 28 domains. Why didn't you point out what a failure it was in your argument (which has already been severely downvoted), unless you were being disingenuous when you evangelized Namecoin as a properly decentralised more secure solution, and not a failed improper insecure vulnerable dead dysfunctional boondoggle, as my quotes and citations proved?
I mention namecoin as a single example of decentralised dns and mention that there are other projects (thats not advocating or evangelising namecoin).
I then point out the major problem with all of these alternative dns, no one uses them because few have incentive to do so.
You responded by calling me a con-man (sounds reasonable) because I had the audacity to mention a technology in one of the only use case's its good at.
> I'm not at all upset (and you're projecting again) -- I'm being sarcastic, and it whooshed right over your head.
I got the sarcasm, I got the name calling, it's childish. If I got more upvotes would you consider my words instead of the con-man image you are projecting? I don't think so.
Yes that was my argument, we are both in agreement why are you so upset?