I agree. In technical terms, the 2013 "switch back" should be considered a downtime event and block variance should not be considered downtime.
I think I'm more approaching this from layman's terms perspective. Bitcoin is usually explained as "10 minute blocks, give or take", so 2 hours for a block does seem like something isn't working. In the event the network loses a significant portion of the miners (network split like Bitcoin Cash, DDOS attack on pools, etc.) blocks could take even more hours to be found. I think at a certain point, it would be rational to claim the network is not working as designed, if blocks are taking much longer than 10 minutes to be found and the mempool is growing drastically.
if blocks are taking much longer than 10 minutes to be found and the mempool is growing drastically.
That is not bitcoin's design.
Bitcoin's design is to, over a long period of time, have the average ~10 minutes per block. A block taking an hour can be a daily occurrence. You can't say a system has failed to perform when it performs as it was designed. You can say the design is a failure, but that's a different argument.
reply