Bitcoin development has never been so exciting - BU, XT, BTCD, bitpay Core variant and now bitcoin classic. This is what open source is all about.
Well, development is about developing new solutions to problems. Not about arguing whether a particular variable should be set at X or Y value.
If that's "development" then 1000 versions could spring up each one having their own proposal for that particular variable (max block size). How would that improve anything? That's not development.
In the end of the day the only people making work that will actually help bitcoin scale more => are core devs.
KISS. Appeal to authority doesn't work against the market.
And vaporware development "works" in the aforementioned market?
Look, I don't know how to code shit (in terms of BTC code), but I do know how to change a few variables / constants. That doesn't make me a developer or someone who can maintain my fork even if the market agrees that I found the right value for maxblocksize.
The scaling issue hides many motives and I'm not sure how deep the rabbit hole goes. I always found it suspect that some people are so hell bent on increasing block size that even if you tell them "ok, let's say we have a tech that effectively doubles the txs that can fit in a 1MB block, like segwit or something... why would you want it to go to 2MB?" and they are like "but it has to go to 2mb". Well, I call bullshit with them. That's hypocrisy. If the 1mb is an effective 2mb, then why would you need the 2 to become 4?
Why would someone, who would say yes if you asked them about a 2mb upgrade, be dissatisfied by a technological equivalent of a 2mb upgrade in terms of tx/s? What's going on here?
Anyway, we need more people who actually code stuff that reduce the kbytes used per block, improve network transmission speeds, reduce cpu cycles needed for processing etc, and do that while maintaining the integrity of the system. Not people tinkering with an existing variable that has known tradeoffs if you set it lower or higher.