Although I don't think blockstream is behind this proposal, I do understand why some people might think (or speculate) that blockstream is behind this proposal. Also just because a few blockstream employees are speaking against does not mean that they are not supporting the proposal behind the scenes, nor that others associated with blocktream are not supporting the proposal behind the scenes (just as the opposite happened with the HK agreement).

Regarding the proposal itself, I believe it is a horribly bad idea, and should obviously not get implemented. The number one rule that moderators need to follow is that any posts by satoshi and posts that satoshi was responding to (eg any communication by or with satoshi) should not be touched. Around a year or so ago, a moderator accidentally deleted a post responding to satoshi, that would likely be considered spam-like if posted today (due to signature spam) and there was quite the stir created.

The reason why so many people visit, and read the Bitcoin whitepaper is because they wish to see how satoshi originally described bitcoin. Although some of the terminology is somewhat outdated/confusing, the whitepaper does allow someone to get a general understanding of how Bitcoin works, and can do additional research to get a more firm understanding of how Bitcoin works. Also when engaging in debates about Bitcoin, many people often cite the whitepaper to provide empirical evidence to support their side.