Skinner’s 405–420 and the social-fork question

DocumentedTimeline event

Date: 2022-07-22 · basis: reported event date

What happened

The European Bitcoiners article embeds Skinner’s “Blocks 405-420” post and describes the fork around securing 420. A same-day Anthony post explicitly names “Skinner Stack(n) / Skinner Stacking(v)” and asks whether to social-fork to prevent it. That contemporary response makes this a documented governance argument as well as a memorable large stack; the original Skinner post was not freshly recoverable.

Archive summary written from the sources below — not a quotation.

From the sources

It all started when AriZonanHODL mined the genesis block at 5 USD with buying #Bitcoin on July 18th, 2022.https://europeanbitcoiners.com/what-the-heck-is-stackchain/

No matter what. No matter how we address this. Stacking this way shall now be referred to as: Skinner Stack(n) Skinner Stacking(v) So the question going forth is; Do we social fork to prevent Skinner Stacking? #stackchainhttps://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1550583498397782017

Receipt

No receipt is held for this entry.

In plain English

Machine-written summary, not an editorial statement.

Provenance

Dated event entry from the archive's web/X history research. Recorded status: sourced. Summarised by the archive from the sources linked below; not a verbatim quotation.

Uncertainty

Event status as recorded by the history research: sourced. The date basis is the reported event date, not necessarily a verified post timestamp.

Part of the Stackchain community archive · the ledger. Coverage-limited: this records what the archive holds and says plainly what it does not. Sourced, testimony and uncertain material are kept visibly distinct and are never promoted by appearing here.