OK, so this isn't principally about 1.6-2.5MB vs 2MB or HF vs SF but a change in governance?
To me it is. I want decentralized development.
This doesn't make any sense ... Bitcoin Classic model of development is more centralized right now than cores. Their is no decentralized governance model established yet , and to assume there will be in the future is hopeful to put it kindly....
I just think its a bit premature to get behind something that is currently setup under the benevolent dictator model. Wouldn't it make sense to first draft a governance model , than promote it ?
I DON'T want Blockstream (a private company)
Consider.it and toom.im aren't private companies owned by 2 brothers as well? You don't find any conflict of interest there?
Decentralized development doesn't make sense to you ?
Not sure why. Makes perfect sense to me.
Better than "best" would be completely separate implementations with separate code bases, preferably in separate programming languages. Separate teams evolving a common code base continues the risks of monoculture.