They are just two very different approaches... I thought the activation of Segwit will then followed by "easier/better" future plan of blocksize increase?
Perhaps we can compromise and buy time by allowing bigger blocks (eg. 2MB) to activate, and then decide if Segwit should be implemented?
or if having an organised hard consensus (meaning old nodes have to drop off anyway(the small minority outside activation threshold)
dynamic blocks (using policy.h(lower bound) as the dynamic flagging scaler) and segwit
keys. where the witness is appended to the tail of the tx.
without needing to have separation(of tree's(blocks)).
that way ALL nodes validate the same thing.
(ill get to the punchline later about the then lack of need for segwit.. but want to see if people run scenario's in their head first to click their lightbulb moment into realising what segwit does or doesnt do)