[stepik777]

> The "New York Agreement" was a blog post, it was never a legally binding and enforceable contract.

More important is that those who signed simply have no power to change Bitcoin.

> There's a strong argument that the "agreement" was designed to fail, as it's hardly a compromise when party A gets what they want immediately, but party B has to wait.

Yeah, especially when party A doesn't even sign any agreement.

[wmf]

I think if all the NYA signatories had gone all-in on 2x they could have killed the 1x chain. Between the majority of miners and a bunch of exchanges and payment processors, they probably do have the power. But the backlash and financial losses would have been significant.