You have always argued using a cleverly layed out mixture of reason... and every underhanded debating tactic in the book. This is the fundamental problem with your strategy; because you're attempting to convince people of something that has no merit, you have no choice but to use manipulative tactics, because genuine reason would lead readers to believe that you're wrong.

The above post is a classic example of your strategy: claiming that I'm misrepresenting your argument, then going on to agree with statements I make about your arguments (an attempt to irritate, presumably, so yeah, you're Mr. Reason on so many levels there). And then you try to conflate code with politics. The only politics in the Bitcoin source code is in the genesis block. So not one statement of yours above is founded in reason, entirely the opposite, and deliberately so. You might want to update the Carlton pscyh profile you've been referring to, lol

So, if you're willing to discuss why you want to depose the present coding team for one of your choice, go ahead. But I am, of course, expecting you to manipulate what I've said to derail back to your contrived scaling debate again. Newsflash: the actual innovators have better solutions, and nonsense arguments about unresolved malleation attacks are just desperate at this point. The person who discovered that attack is an XT/Classic bete noir, Peter Todd. And it's been squashed to the satisfaction of most Core developers, only really care and diligence in their testing methodology has prevented them closing the git issue. None of your preferred programming team either discovered or solved the bug, they simply carped about it from the sidelines like wolves trying to bully bigger stronger prey.

So go ahead, try and re-open that flank that closed up on you months ago. While the real Bitcoiners still have a pulse, you've got no chance