This is still a slippery slope argument. You're assuming that the Bitcoin ecosystem is so stupid that they will adopt just any change no matter how destructive it would be.
It's not stupidity. It's just that most people in the ecosystem are formulating an opinion based on a fraction of the data and possible implications.
If so, then Bitcoin is doomed anyways and we should just all give up. If there are no arguments pro core and/or against this XT implementation then I don't see what you're trying to say here.
I'm saying leave the experts of the core team to do their work. They know what to do and they're doing it well.
PS. You can disagree with Gavin, but to suggest that he doesn't know what he's doing warrants a bit of an explanation. I would be very interested to hear how he went from chief scientist to bumbling ignoramus.
Well, if avg block size is currently at 0.4mb (and even that is full of dust / spam txs which will be wiped out once fee competition starts for 1mb inclusion) and he says we "urgently" need 8mb and that's a very serious reason to fork it while in the process creating a rift among the devs and risking market uncertainty, well... you don't need to be a rocket scientist to realize that something very fishy is going on.
I don't believe he doesn't know what he is doing. He probably knows full well. It's the whole false rationale, motives and modus operandi that I'm having issues with.
If you look at the number of transactions between Jul 2013 and Jan 2014 there is a period where the number of transactions excluding popular addresses doubles. What I see is that if we get another bull run like that, the blocksize will probably hit the ceiling. So there is a bit of urgency to it.
Now, we might not have another bull run any time soon, but in case it happens next month I'd like to see that
somebody has a solution lined up. And at this point I fear that a fee hike might strangle Bitcoin in its infancy.
In any event, why do we have to wait until the house is on fire before we buy a fire extinguisher?
And if you, and everyone else who are such gung ho core loyalists, really believe Gavin has a hidden agenda, could you please tell me what that agenda is thought to be? There's a lot of cloudy insinuations, but nothing really to suggest that he wants anything else than what he deems to be best for Bitcoin.