Well yeah... everything is limited by bandwidth. You don't have much of a point there.

Before you see it, only on guy in China will validate all your transactions because he has the funds and free energy to hoard all the blocks for himself. Which almost happened - almost, because UASF.

Yeah no. Not quite how the game theory works. Or the economics. Or UASF for that matter.

You do need new solutions. Nobody disagrees there. No LN does not work and is inherently centeralized - is that bad, maybe not but it is not the catch all. All off chain solutions are inherently less secure than a Bitcoin transaction. Do you want Bitcoin to be an extremely centeralized settlement layer?

Small blocks lead to more centralization than larger blocks. Period.

Nobody is talking about 2GB blocks tomorrow. 32MB would serve us just fine for the near term. No centeralization risk there.

How did it end?
Well they were silenced by groups looking to capitalize on a crippled bitcoin by developing sidechains.

It would be best to gradually increase block size and add upgrades to bitcoin - but at the moment chinese miners almost took bitcoin for themselves. With bigger blocks it would be much easier for them. Bitcoin is for users, not miners. But that's just my opinion. In the end I like the fact, that there's so much debate, that really smart people (not me!) are trying to find best option. Conflict is an inherent part of this. Cheers.

Yep a gradual increase is how it should be done. Bitcoin ABC, Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin Unlimited all support this feature -- Emergent consensus is a thing too.

You are wrong about the Chinese miner thing. How on earth would it make it easier for them. Last I checked Xthin was freaking developed to make it easier for them to propagate blocks. Chinese have a hard time with that great firewall of theirs. How did the Chinese miners almost take Bitcoin for themselves?

Miners are large stakeholders in the network. They are users.

There is a reason I'm the one ponying up hashrate here.

Conflict is absolutely inherent.