[Erlich_Bachman]

In all practical senses it is scarce. It is the protocol and consensus of the people using it that makes it scarce. If you disagree, go ahead just make your own BTC and see how "easy" it is to convince other people to use it instead of BTC or some other mainstream coin. (Some people even tried exactly that...)

[root_axis]

You can't really know how easy it might be for me. For example, if my name was Vitalik Buterin or Elon Musk or even Donald Trump, I could trivially create my own cryptocurrency and a lot of people would use it.

[doggosphere]

Creating a new cryptocurrency doesn't make Bitcoin less scarce.

At worst your coin takes time and attention away from Bitcoin, and thus takes value. At best it outgrows Bitcoin, and grows the entire space.

But that's like saying you could build your own alternative to Facebook by whipping up some corporate partnerships and venture capital. Go ahead, we'll see which one wins in the long run.

[root_axis]

I did not say it would.

[ball_of_lint]

Sure - you can make another cryptocurrency if you want. That currency will not be bitcoin.

Some people tried this before by branching off the bitcoin blockchain. That was called bitcoin cash, and it failed.

Bitcoins, meaning not any cryptocurrency but just actual bitcoins, are scarce and will almost certainly remain so.

[root_axis]

I never said it would be bitcoin.

[ric2b]

But it still wouldn't change the scarcity of Bitcoin.

[root_axis]

I did not say it would.

[kinakomochidayo]

It's easier for those with the funds, and connections to manipulate, and censor discussions about other forks - and some pro-Segwit people did exactly that with the 2017 hard fork, like on /r/bitcoin, bitcointalk, etc.