I&#x27;m not sure if you are being serious but all three of your points are bogus to some extent.<p>1. The link you provided clearly shows classic and core 0.12 tied for the number of nodes.  Support for Classic is much higher than reflected in that chart because there is an ongoing DDOS against classic nodes.  Just a few days ago there was over 2,000 Classic nodes.  You are also leaving out all the nodes that are voting for a block size increase but aren&#x27;t classic nodes like Bitcoin Unlimited, and some remaining XT nodes.  Once you account for all these factors support for Classic or a block size increase in general is higher than core 0.12 by double or more.<p>2. Bitcoin Classic has only been out for a week or two of course classic nodes are &#x27;new&#x27;.  Further a lot of people running classic are doing it in parallel with core before making the switch.  Several large high profile mining operations have said as much.<p>3. Renting hash power has always been a huge sector of the Bitcoin mining industry rented hash power is no more or less legitimate than any other kind.  Classic has only been out for a couple weeks and we are just seeing large miners start to mine classic blocks starting this past week.  The likely scenario is that they will switch to a 50&#x2F;50 scenario to start before going 100% classic as a mitigation against DDOS attacks.<p>I think the question any observer should ask themselves is if core has such massive support as you and others claim then why do they resort to illegal tactics like DDOSing alternative node implementations and similar dirty tricks?