Honestly, I don't care about LN since I will never use it and I'm pretty sure it will only turn out to be a ripple 2.
LN is not centralized. You're starting with false information again.
Oh right. Now I should shut up because I don't have a degree in economics or something like that? Well, I would prefer to remain on the factual level instead on a personal one.
Engineering. If you don't have a relevant degree/knowledge then I have no idea why you're trying to tell the engineers how to do their job. This has nothing to do with a personal level.
Surely we have to be prepared for the worst case scenario. That's why I will not support LN. Since it will turn out in the worst case scenario that bitcoin is unuseable for normal usage and LN will turn out to be some kind of bank.
Completely different of everything we bitcoiner wanted bitcoin to be in the last 5 years I'm here.
Completely false. Bitcoin will not be adopted on a global level (it can't) without solutions such as the LN (which is not comparable to a bank).
We've been in a LN discussion at least once and I've told you all of this. So stop wasting my time or I'll put you back on my list.
Why bother when we know that holders have no power over bitcoin network at all? We all know our views are not important.
Only miners, hash whales and bitcoin companies could have something to say here.
I'm certain that they have. Your definition of a 'holder' is wrong as you must be thinking in very small quantities of money.