i was actually putting a critical/unbiased hat on and playing with the blockstreamers mindset that:
"BU couldnt fix their own problems and found out after things went public."
(their rhetoric)

and putting shoe on the other foot and switching it, to ask
if those events were involving blockstream(core) code where the community exploited first. rather than secretly inform first(peer review) what would they do

point being.
if core are "independent" then they should help each other out. not kiss ass of one team and only one team. as thats just centralist mindset
EG if core prefer to dominate and stick to a higher TIER, then they have no PEER.

bitcoin should be about PEER review not TIER review

xt, classic, btcd, btcc, statoshi, core, knots, BU etc should all be on the same level playing field in regards to a open community of PEER REVIEW
and not the cat and mouse game of
'im not gonna peer review their code'
then same person
'its not peer reviewed so cant be good'
meaning if your not going to review it. then dont complain about it not being reviewed

EG like a book critic not reading a book. then crying it must be bad because its not been critiqued