We don't know, but (and I believe this to be the case) if the developers are not petulant children arguing on a forum such as this, then its likely that their discussion will revolve around finding the common ground in between opposing opinions. That would be a more interesting discussion to be having but all I see every day are polarised opinions (presented as fact). Exaggeration by both camps, hostility, refusal to move from entrenched positions and mischarecterisation of others views.
Maybe you're not looking hard enough?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3uzwgs/scaling_bitcoin_2_in_just_5_days/You're fooling yourself if you expect productive development to be held "on a forum such as this"
I'm going to clarify what I posted because I don't really understand why you have responded the way you have.
"petulant children arguing on a forum such as this" refers to the people on this forum that argue like petulant children
"but, if the developers are not" is a clause, which is prefixed by the statement "We don't know," which speaks to the nature of truth - such that unless you are one of the developers then you can't really know for sure however I included a subclass in parenthesis (and I believe this to be the case) to indicate that whilst I may not know I believe it to be the case (that "the developers are not").
You can re-arrange this sentence thusly "I believe the developers are not petulant children arguing on a forum such as this. Though, it is not possible for me to know that is a fact." however one can never really know". The reason I didn't write it in this order is because the words at the beginning of the sentence (comment on nature of truth) are less important and it is in the readers nature to focus on the later part of complex clause than the earlier part. This is why the last part of the sentence is drawing attention to the fact that people on this forum argue like petulant children. This is a contrast to to what the developers are (hopefully) doing. The very last part of that first sentence was the most important part though ", then its likely that their discussion will revolve around finding the common ground in between opposing opinions."
That's the bit i really wanted to stress, which is why its at the end.
Your response implies that you thought I said the opposite. Is that intentional, or just a genuine mistake?