I have the same theory. The scaling debate brought instability, then which Segwit activation stabilized and ended the debate. It also brought divisiveness, which Segwit couldn’t fix, BUT I’m confident none of the big blockers that matter SODLed. Roger Ver still HODLs Bitcoin. It would be stupid of him, or anyone, to sell Bitcoin for Bcash.
I was very new when all of that happened. All I knew was that the miners who wanted bigger blocks went their way but eventually they also saw how bad the other camp was and everyone then decided to go Segwit. No more debate other than stubborn things about price and speed but I remember,,, this was proof of how Bitcoin becomes stronger after overcoming a difficulty.
Taproot is nowhere near to causing the same conflict so I do not see it as a big difficulty.
During the scaling debate, months before the UASF cleared the path to a true understanding of Bitcoin, community, and consensus, as a newbie, what was your viewpoint on “big blocks or small blocks”? I was also a newbie with a different perspective.
