It's another vain attempt to communicate to the core devs to increase the effing blocksize. Nobody seems to be listening.
Personally I'm sick of the cult-like core devotees who claim to be intelligent and technically knowledgeable.
Personally I'm sick of people not being willing to understand or accept that an allegedly 'simple' blocksize increase exposes the network to a DoS risk. Yes it was thought a plain blocksize increase would be fine in the past; now we know better. Does that mean we should plough on regardless, knowing it's flawed?
I would surmise that even a large majority of the big blockers realize that they are just spouting off bullshit - and I think that there has been a considerable amount of evidence that a lot of them are merely paid banking shills.
So, yeah, it all sounds fine and dandy to argue for an increase in the blocksize limit, but the smarter big blockers likely don't even believe their own bullshit.
We also know that a large number of these big blockers have been propagating this big blocker nonsense for nearly two years and even a little bit before the current bullrun from the lower $200s to $1350 (correction down to $891) and now floating in the $1,145 territory.
Surely through the past couple of years big blocker nonsense has been able to contribute to causing some loss of confidence in bitcoin from some folks which likely exacerbates BTC price corrections and causes less upwards BTC price pressures, yet the ongoing upwards price pressures does tend to demonstrate that a lot of the "smart" money in bitcoin realizes that these various big blocker saboteurs are not too likely to cause any kind of significant and meaningful interference to the main trend and adoption of bitcoin as the best of the cryptos and the most secure, solid and immutable of the cryptos (which immutability is a feature and not a bug in bitcoin).
Accordingly, even if we do not ultimately achieve getting seg wit (which I kind of doubt), bitcoin is still going to continue to have a considerable amount of value because of its inability to be changed easily - even if it were to stay in a kind of current 1mb forever status which is also not too likely of a scenario because it seems quite likely that various powers that be in core including the realization of the superiority of the seg wit solution within the larger bitcoin community is going to cause some kind of ways to slip aspects of seg wit into the protocol, even if it ends up being some combination of support that shows consensus coming from various other aspects of the bitcoin community outside of the miners - yet without necessarily only seeking 95% of the miners..
Maybe some of those minority miners are going to have to direct their engergies (and their mining power, if that is what they got to offer) somewhere else. Ultimately, bitcoin should not be held hostage by mining power, and there is quite a lot of mining power in existence, so if several of the miners direct their resources somewhere else under the belief that they can be more profitable ways and at other coins, for example, then maybe that would also be a decent solution.. So, yeah, currently, there may be some miners, too, who are attempting to play a card to attempt to show that they have a better hand than they actually have (that is called bluffing, unless they actually play the card, which might be the better outcome since quite few folks already realize that they are exaggerating what cards that they actually have to play).
