52% to 72% of hashpower*, two of the most respected developers**, plus what looks like a majority of community sentiment in favor*** are saying otherwise. Oh, right, and I forgot to mention loaded posted he's in favor of 2MB****
* Depending on whether you believe rumors of "false pledges of 2MB allegiance" by some pools.
I believe most miners are indeed in favor of 2MB capacity , but also understand that is what segwit provides.True. I believe the (likely) majority I cite above doesn't really care
how a total tx capacity increase is achieved, only
that it is achieved.
That said:
1. Segwit likely constitutes a somewhat smaller increase in tx capacity than a maxblocksize change to 2MB. Bitcoin core itself mentions "1.6MB to 2MB", depending on the type of transaction.
2. What the consensus (I claim exists) really shows is that - technical questions aside - the
economical assumptions of the smallblockers arguments are rejected by miners, community, and large economic entities (several of the major companies, and at least a few known cases of major capital holders).
In other words: 2MB maxblocksize or not, segwit now or later -- in any case, the majority of the Bitcoin economy seems to be against artificial transaction scarcity.This last point is something the economically motivated smallblock proponents (as opposed to the technically motivated ones) need to wrap their head around, but seem unwilling to do, so far at least.