Answer: not enough support for it to happen with an intact community.
I think calling off the fork was the right move, and this coming from someone who is heavily politically and sentimentally aligned with the backers of 2x.
SegWit2x was a good faith attempt to keep the bitcoin community united. It was a strategic mistake to agree to Segwit first on a conditional promise to fork to 2mb later. That was never going to happen, and BitcoinCash was only a convenient cassus belli.
It’s been disappointing to see where the rhetoric from both sides has led, and for me personally it’s been instructive in human nature, conflict over resources, and our capacity for magnified disagreements.
Going forward, we will see empirical competition between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. If big blocks are indeed a risk to centralization, then no one will use Bitcoin Cash, and BitcoinSegWit will always be there. If high transaction fees are a bigger risk toward centralization, then we will see users and businesses move away from Blockstream’s vision and toward BitcoinCash.
For now, we have seen nothing but a trend toward more centralization from all parties, the same we see in other human conflicts like warfare…where even decentralization-inspired institutions like the US Confederacy or the South African Boers are competitively forced into centralized planning of logistics and coordination.
We’re talking about humans and money here, so the “best” product will not necessarily win. The picture is becoming more clear, however, and I’m glad there is a peaceful way to move past this mess.
I’m on board with Bitcoin.com’s editorial position: Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin.
At the time of this post, 1 Bitcoin traded for $7,187 on Coinbase and 1 Bitcoin Cash traded for $636 on Kraken.