there is nothing bad in realising these facts, learning from mistakes and then trying something different.
Except you don't want to try something different. You want to copy shitty forkcoins and their utterly backwards approach to "scaling" (and it's not actually scaling in the accepted sense of the word).
funny part is that i have been talking about scaling transaction counts onchain before the forkcoins existed
and by scaling.. you have no idea what that word means.
you shout the word "bigger blocks" while ignoring actual options.
i have said even years ago about a block that SCALES
heck i have en said about scsaling transaction counts within the current limits too
then you for years have been saying anyone that wants scaling wants LEAPS of blocksize(facepalm)
as for who does or doesnt want something different. you want people to obediently follow core roadmap and want anyone else suggesting anything else to STFU and F**k OFF
so its you that doesnt want things to change away from a corporate plan
heck for years there have been suggestions made about your favoured subnetwork. and you have screamed how people should shut up and stop talking abut x,y,z
as for other bitcoin things i have said about fee mechanisms that only punish the bloaters. and YOU are the one that shouts how everyone should pay more, whilst letting the bloat continue. onchain or use another network
heck if its not cores sponsored roadmap, you want all those against it to use other networks
yes YOU have screamed your version of scaling is: "100mb blocks asap" as your argument to say no to scaling
yet many many people including me have been saying about scaling as small but regular adjustments to increase transaction count.. which is the true definition of scaling
also fee mechanisms to reduce spam to allow more genuine transactors. and fee mechanisms that only punish the bloat/spammers to punish the bad and incentivise the good for having more transaction opportunity without impunity for being a lean non spammy user
you cry that removing spam is censorship when reality is the spam bloat censors out genuine transactors
you have things backwards
...
as for lightning. its not fit for purpose.
basic common sense and maths shows the more users on it the more it actually bottlenecks and fails
but rather the fix the flaws you and your idols just want to waste YEARS advertising its dream to people rather than fixing the flaws to make the dream a reality.
lightning has failed so many physics/math/economic policies of effective monetary policy that lightning would have to go backwards and start again if it was to even try living up to its promises
however bitcoin does not need to go backwards. just needs to stop future crap continuing, and concentrate on going forward in a proper scalable way that works and has security precautions of nodes first activation second. to secure the network as a priority. not secure human devs god-mode title