I think it is an opinion coming from someone that is probably not a developer and thus that does not understand the intricacies of the scaling debate in any real way and has instead allowed himself to be pursuaded by a bunch of mumbo-jumbo and character assassination from those who "wish" things could be a certain way by waving some kind of magic wand, but are not inisghtful enough to realize that their so-called wand would break the very thing they purport to care about. I think you must also be a bad judge of character if you doubt the motives of the core team developers -- employed by blockstream or otherwise.
Is it reasonable for an uninformed person to hold such an opinion? I guess that's arguable. I personally usually do not make public statements about things I do not understand very well. And I certainly do not make public statements impugning the character and motives of public persons based on random hearsay and groupthink.
Surely, as a developer of 20+ years experience, you're intelligent enough to understand why that is a reasonable opinion for someone to have?
Everyone knows that Blockstream has received $71M in VC.
As recently as a few months ago, there was a guise (imo) of Blockstream being primarily
interested in developing sidechain technology as their primary offering, which
never made sense since there is really no clear market for such a thing (afaik)
Now even Blockstream admits on their own website their intentions to
offer scaling solutions via LN, which makes perfect sense as far as having a
viable business plan to recoup the invested funds, which is what many suspected all along.
Blockstream's principals had a vision of how they wanted to scale Bitcoin and
formed a company around it. Perhaps they truly believe their corporate interests
are 100% aligned with the interest of Bitcoin, and perhaps you believe that,
but if you cannot at least see why many would doubt this, or see a conflict of
interest, or see the possibility that technical positions could become influenced by
corporate positions , then I would question your judgement.