To me, it seems that the status quo of bitcoin is the current 1mb limit on the blocksize,
It may seem that way to you. Another way of looking at it is that, until very recently, the max block size was no factor in the economics of bitcoin.
WTF? I am only attempting to describe the status quo, and this should not be a controversy.
I can spot you the assertion that you are describing the
technical status quo. However, maintaining the technical status quo has necessitated a deviation from the
economic status quo. My viewpoint is that the technical status quo (1MB max block size) pales in significance to the economic status quo (enough room in the block on average to accommodate all transactions the miners might be willing to include). We can argue about which of these are more significant. What is indisputable is that there is more than one aspect to declaring 'status quo'.
It appears that you are attempting to describe some kind of abstraction in order to obscure the real issue, and really what you say about an economic status quo or a technical status quo, does not change the result, and that is that consensus has not been achieved in order to make a change from 1 mb to 2bg or a hard fork or changes in consensus.
Surely and admittedly failing and refusing to change can have negative impacts, but failure/refusal to act is not the same as acting. Yes, you are getting into abstraction when you suggest that a failure to act is an act, but in the real world, the impact of a failure/refusal to act, is merely an argument to attempt to justify why acting is necessary rather than creating an obligation that action has to take place (which you seem to be attempting to assert). To repeat, in this regard, you seem to be suggesting that there is some kind of obligation to act to make a change because of an arguable and likely real negative impact that resulted from failure/refusal to act, which is really not true, and you should know better.
Nonetheless, the plan to implement seg wit seems to have reached consensus...
If The SegWit Omnibus Changeset had reached consensus, we would not be arguing over it, now would we?
I did not know that we were arguing about seg wit
Color me incredulous. The 'community' has been arguing over this since first proposed at 'SBHK'. You've been participating in these arguments. How can you not be aware of them?
You can be as "incredulous" as you like. It doesn't change the fact that it appears to me that seg wit is not so much in dispute, but rather the main arguments are regarding other changes that are failing to achieve consensus and those are 1) an immediate or nearly immediate increase in the actual block size limit from 1 mb to 2mb 2) change consensus procedures 3) create a future schedule of automatic blocksize limit increases and 4) there may be some others that are less in the spotlight but still causing various loud mouth whining and complaining.
I don't claim to know all the details about the exact parameters of implementing Seg wit besides what I had described that code has been written and it is being tested and there is a general consensus that seg wit should be implemented as soon as it sufficiently passes the testing, which at this time, is anticipated to be April or May. Surely some people may be continuing to whine about seg wit blah blah blah.. but amongst the large majority of significant players including the 5 core devs, large majority of miners and other influential people in the bitcoin space, seg wit is not being contended as being in dispute. The only disputes really relate to the first of my above 3 points in that a number of minority whiners who are loud and obnoxious are continuing to whine about the other matters and even suggesting that they should come before seg wit.. blah blah blah..
If you are contending that seg wit is really and materially in dispute, then please provide some contemporary evidence of such, rather than just saying that it is in dispute because what you are saying to suggest that seg wit has not reached consensus in its current planning form makes little to no sense.