when you ignore users desires for features, and instead want to just kiss ass a dev. you forget what the devs job is

yes bitcoin is 'open source' but thats just a buzzword for 'you can read our code'

when it comes to welcoming membership of the dev team. there is a closed hierarchy. where only a select few are welcomed. and allowed priority access to certain things

take the recent integration of its newest member, gloria. she is part of the corporate sponsorship working outside core in a team called brinks which is fundd by the same corporation as blockstream where her boss outside of core. is one of the guys that merged her keys into the core maintainer list. her colleagues outside of core were the very same guys that 'ack' her application into the core dev list.

hey i know you want to say "ignore it its meaningless" but if you ignore the dev team of cores actions. you might aswell just give them a free pass to do whatever they want and not scrutinise/review their work and simply just human flaw emotional Trust' the humans you fan guirl over. and not want to defend the code from abuse. .
sorry but when people prefer to kiss a dev and not want to defend the code. thats where abuse happens.

for anyone that has tried to make a REFERENCE client of a full node thats not part of the 'core' dev branding, they get treated like outsiders, competition, threat. thus everyone ends up relying on core.. like zombies

core has become the central CORE of the protocol evolution where people no longer just make their own wallet to then offer the community an oppertunity to upgrade the protocol. instead an upgrade to the protocol requires proving to core devs that they should implement it in core because everyone follows cores lead.

thus everyone then just ends up using core software.
yes i personally can and have in my wallet got the ability to associate the message signing of segwit key with a P2wpk address at a gui level. but that does not help the majority who may want to verify my messages as they are mostly using core.. which does not have such feature, so althought i can verify my own message done via segwit addresses. for the pure fact of majjority. i prefer to use legacy keys to make other peoples lives easier, and infact my own life easier. because trying to get core to do anything outside their corporate roadmap is just met with resistance and hostility.

this topic proves people want a feature that should have been available 5 years ago. and 5 years later its still not there. so that proves devs laziness and arrogance to average joe users needs.

so when core devs make decisions to ignore users wanting features and treat any bip thats not part of the core devs roadmap, as a threat or whatever excuse they find. then that is where the devs are not doing their job properly
yes core devs do add features. but not the ones average joe want. they add the ones corporations want.

people want cheap fee's and the ability to use BITCOIN witout being told that their transaction is not worthy or that only the elite should have the blockspace and where the 2billion unbanked should not get to use bitcoin because they simply dont earn enough to pay the fee. thus all the 'unbanked' features promised of bitcoin to average joe in the early days have gone.
 corporations want new opt-in tx formats to use as locks/pegs to bridge to other networks. guess which features take priority. and which features are forgotten about once the corps get their basic features added

yep segwit got implemented so that LN, liquid, and other sidechains can then lock and peg bitcoin. to then reference those locks for their altnet pegged units of measure. but because message signing was not part of the corporation requirements of the sponsored project, core devs didnt add that. and so normal average joe that doesnt need to use segwit for locking up funds, but may want just an address that has all the stuff legacy has, finds segwit lacking, because its incomplete in comparison to legacy
and no dont BS me with the 'segwit offers fee discount'. no . reality is the cludge of pushing segwit in, came with  making legacy 4x more expensive not the other way round(not to make segwit cheaper). thus users didnt get the discount compared to their 2015-16 experience.

yea i get it "devs should not be told what to do" but here is the thing they are paid by corporate interests to do what they are told to implement features even though those features are cludgy and unfinished for the normal user experience. where the user experience is not what it seems or as promised/promoted to them

and no dont even try the BS about the low level devs that just review and spellcheck. or add comments. im talking about the actual maintainers and main commiters and merger devs that make the actual decisions of what gets in