It is helpful to clarify and confirm that some of the agitation for 2MB is merely for the sake of "a test of Core team's willingness to listen" (wherein "listen" actually means "obey").
A contentious hard fork is not a "a small compromise" because it puts the entire system at risk of catastrophic consensus failure (and will almost certainly crash the price).
The 'you have to give me something because otherwise you're uncompromising and I will pout' negotiation tactic will not work on Bitcoin engineering decisions.
Our Honey Badger really does not care about hurt feelings from pushy token-demanding nobodies (of any nationality).
If Honey Badger starts negotiating and compromising simply to appease emotionally needy peoples' pleas for a pat on the head, the Bitcoin experiment ends in failure.
I hope this helps you understand why a 2MB increase is not as easy as throwing a bone to a barking dog.
I thought that the core devs wanted to listen to "the community"? Now you are telling me that yes, they may condensed themselves but whatever you Chinese may have to say, it is of no consequence and should have zero effect on the outcome because we know better? Excuse my poor English but this strikes me as a bit condescending.
FYI, Eric, iCEBREAKER is not a core dev.