you're missing the point. the act of leaving by those devs requires a conscious act and decision to do the "right" thing. how can we keep trying to sell Bitcoin to the world as a "trustless" system when we have to "trust" Blockstream devs to do the right thing?
Sorry dude, I cannot imagine you making that strained argument with a straight face in light of the fact that we already rely on 'trust' in Bitcoin itself in exactly the same manner. Lots of people are scratching their head about where you are coming from due to obviously nonsense statements like this.
This is especially the case in light of the fact that Gavin is paid, and relatively handsomely, by what a plurality of folks seem to now recognize (so it seems) as a loathsome institution which downsizes mainly when crooks get caught and belatedly kicked out. It is no stretch to consider the Bitcoin Foundation as being blatantly crooked insofar as it takes funds and supports frauds like inputs.io, and just as bad, seems highly prone to such conspiracies as 'red-listing' which is near universally considered an abomination. All under the cloak of quasi-secrecy, and god only knows what happens in the real core of the organization.
Even having two shit-bag organizations fighting one another is preferable to having only one, and I see a high likelihood that Blockstream will be anything but. My only hope is that Blockstream stands up to the Bitcoin Foundation machinations and call them out as needed. And hopefully bury them eventually.
gimme a break. you trying to smear Gavin for being paid by a NON-PROFIT organization is pure blasphemy. he's paid a salary in BTC which is probably quite modest by ordinary standards. AND he doesn't have any stock to try and pump or investors to please. to think he has anything to do with any of the things you're talking about is ridiculous. he's as apolitical as one gets and we all should be thankful he's lead. you're still that little dog who nips at my trouser bottoms.