About the block size, Unlimited is still one CPU one vote. And the governance model of Bitcoin should not changed too much. The problem with Core is that some developers are trying to take control. However, if we let the ordinary transactions to have power, it is also change of the governance model. People are very easy to be led by some people like Greg, who is good at soliciting and intimidation. We should keep the same governance model of Bitcoin as it is.[doublepost=1472399914][/doublepost]And I also oppose the idea of sharding. Sharding is beautiful technically, but we should not do it right now.Right now the block size of Bitcoin is only 1MB, and every year the blockchain data is around 50GB. If the block size goes up to 64MB, the blockchain data per year will be 3TB. Then let us take a look at the price of the hard drive:Surprisingly cheap!!!And of course, there is pruning technologies that is already working in Core! Right now you can store the pruned data of blockchain history with only 2GB size! ( https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-core-released-what-s-new-1456241356 We should make less change as long as there is no problems. Sharding could be done when the block size is already more than 1GB or something like that. And even at that time, I doubt the necessary to do the sharding, as for so valuable payment network, even with 1GB blocksize the technology is able to handle the problems very well with the 1GB block size.Now the Unlimited and other non-Core side development teams are all short of developers. With the very few developers, we should focus on doing the right thing in the best quality, but not spending precious time on the beautiful but temporally useless idea now.