if you read what gmaxwell wrote. not with a blind devotion of gmaxwell hat. but an methodical and open minded hat on you will see he avoided the critical context and was wishy washy about the critical stuff and just knit picked the stupidest things he can find.

EG arguing about version numbers.
EG arguing about how segwit nodes dont have to white list segwit nodes..

when my posts on previous page and even segwits own guide, were about whitelisting old nodes (downstream modules as gmaxwell wants to call them)

my post on previous page with the images explained how old (downstream) nodes wont accept segwit transactions. so segwit has to be the gate keeper(upstream) in the middle joining to the pool not randomly on the outside going through an old nodes.

but hey. i bet you just skimmed what he said and just thought "oh well its gmaxwell lets trust him"

gmaxwell has been known to slide around the truth and throw in buzzwords to make what one person says.

he tried to do it before when i said about his confidential payment codes CPC being upto 1kb+.. he said there was no such thing as a confidential payment code in confidential transactions,
but he soon shut up when i started using his buzzwords of his "confidential Pedersen commitments" CPC being 1kb+

so dont let him throw big words at you and make him side step the critical stuff. because he is known to sidestep issues and brush things under the carpet if you dont use his buzzwords

eg he will deny intentional splits but will agree if you call it a bilateral fork..

. in my reply to him you will see what i mean where he side steps the context of the critical stuff