Its pretty exhausting because it is difficult to determine what you are trying to communicate.
This post in particular is merely self contradictory rhetoric. It doesn't contain any reasoned arguments.
Parse it yourself and you will see...
Either (a) side chains have no capability to "mess with" Bitcoin, or (b) they are empowered to improve, ensure preservation, and adaptability...
Then, you claim to know the purpose of side chains. As if there is only one purpose that *the people* that create side chains can have. This is an outlandishly impossible claim to make.
Followed by another self contradiction. Either (a) side chains do not change the incentive structure, or (b) they improve it. Both of these can not be true.
I think you should just stop advocating for side chains. You are a bad spokesperson for the cause. People will read these posts of yours and get the idea that someone is hyping SC for some nefarious purpose, because these posts of yours just don't make sense, and not even internally consistent with itself.
I knew this would be your argument, and yes, I can see how it might sound contradictory.
Adrian's use of those terms, "mess with" and "change", were made in a notably pejorative way. My point is that these changes are, IMO, for the better. Someone could have a different opinion but while you accuse me of not making sense, the same could be said of much of the arguments made against SC so far in this thread.
FTFU Caution and contemplative Im not seeking confrontation just understanding, accusing me of lack of understanding while ignoring the issue is pejorative.