Again, sad interpretation. Rather, if you dislike how things operate, you have two choices:
So now it's two choices, we are getting to something, yes, I have always said the same thing, if you don't like how things are, start doing something, run your own client, email mining pools, and exchanges, don't just sit here and complain, it's the same thing I say to those who want larger blocks and those who are today nagging about Ordinals and demanding core devs to change the protocol just to ban ordinals.
I hope that the two of us are talking about the exact same point here, I am ONLY opposing the "If you don't like how things are with BTC, go use xyz" I am only against this particular stupid statement, why? because I think it's stupid, but any other rational argument against those who want to change the protocol is always welcomed.
Now in this context let me quote DooMAD reply to mine
If you don't like what's in the current code, create your own client. Create an account on GitHub, select the option to fork the codebase, make whatever changes you like. Then release it. Share it around. That way, you start to get a sense of what support a given proposal truly has.
And if you don't know how to code, you can pay a coder to write code. You could pay a whole bunch of them. Fund an entire dev team. If you don't have money, you can crowdsource. But no, people just want to complain and do nothing constructive to even try to change the situation. And that's why the status quo remains.
In another topic discussion block size, I said
Every argument and counter-argument is valid depending on how you view them. Many people avoid getting into these discussions because many in the crypto community are narcissists and want BTC to be what they want it to be. If you speak for larger blocks, they accuse you of being CW's puppet; if you advocate for smaller blocks, you are now Core's pawn.
So now you need to be realistic with yourself and ask: Why would this change?
Miners are content with people competing to get into the block.
Exchanges are satisfied because there's more incentive to keep your BTC in their custody for cheap internal exchange and transfers, or to exchange your BTC for other coins when making smaller payments.
Most users don't seem bothered; we see people paying 8000 sat/Vbyte when potential fees are 300 sats/Vbyte.
People pay millions to mint some ugly JPEGs, and those who call themselves 'normal users' pay even higher fees than them to transact.
If you think BTC isn't working, then you need some fact-checking. It is working, it's in high demand, and the world doesn't give a damn about the 100 folks who want to set their fees at 1 sat/Vbyte to get into the next block. Sad fact? Indeed. Will it change anything? Hell no.
So, given the above and considering the risks involved in the transition, and the fact that people didn't give up on BTC despite high fees, it would be foolish for anyone to think that a block increase is going to happen anytime soon.