Thanks for taking the time to explain this to me (a newcomer and observer to all this).
Something’s off though. One the one hand the folks from BU say the right things (i.e make Bitcoin a mainstream currency, lower transaction fees, follow the vision Satoshi Nakamoto originally had etc), but then they (IF allegations are true) want to release sub-standard code (not properly peer reviewed) and cause a hard fork that could actually damage the Bitcoin brand.
Could BCC actually be funded (behind the scenes) by someone against the ‘Big Blockers’? I heard it said that the code behind BCC was developed largely by a single developer (obviously not in the spirit of the original vision), giving it a much higher probability of failure. Such a failure would play into the hands of parties not supporting big blocks. “See, we told you big blocks were a bad idea” they’d say.
It’s a pity that all these brilliant brains can’t come together and present the right solution. One that would cement Bitcoin as THE undisputed world currency. Instead the arguments are just playing right into the hands of Central Bankers and Regulators.