I'm a big fan of Roger Ver and I am a supporter of Bitcoin Unlimited.  With that said, I am getting somewhat frustrated with some of his arguments or at least the way he supports some of his arguments.  I've been involved in bitcoin for a decent amount of time.  Late 2011 is when I became involved.  While not as long as Roger, in the history of bitcoin, this can be considered a somewhat early adopter.  I find it somewhat insulting when he supports his argument with the position as if his opinion or viewpoint has more weight than others that have come to bitcoin at a later date.  We're all in this together and we all need each-other to succeed.  I agree with almost all the points that he is making when supporting larger blocks.  I agree with his viewpoint on thinblocks, censorship and the adjustable blocksize.  I have a problem with him however when he frames his argument with the attitude that he is somehow morally superior because he came to the game earlier than others and I can guarantee that he is not gaining support with this attitude. 

On a separate note, I think Tone Vays is great commentator on the state of bitcoin today and I think his cryptoscam podcast is a needed addition to the podcast scene.  I also commend him for taking on the challenge to debate the blocksize issue with Roger Ver.  My question however, is why is Tone Vays ushered into the role of defending Bitcoin Core.  I have never seen a member of the Bitcoin Core stand up in a debate such as this willing to confront Bitcoin Unlimited supporters in such a way.  Congratulations for Tone for taking on the challenge.  I think he did a great job, but even he admits that he is not technologically proficient enough to answer some of the detailed questions.  SO why has no developer within the bitcoin core been willing to do this?  If someone has a link to such a debate I would love to review it.  If not, it doesn't support their argument.