neither of them accepting bitcoin matters right now. what matters is ameliorating some of the protocol's deficiencies that have become apparent as of late. i think we are well past the stage of which merchant is accepting bitcoin and which isn't. we've learned that that approach of moving bitcoin forward doesn't work. sure, huge hype as overstock, microsoft, etc. accept, they see some volume, but then dissipates a month later as the only early adopters who have bitcoin and are willing to spend move on. we need to solve the underlying problem of getting consumers to acquire/use bitcoin before merchant adoption becomes a relevant issue again. the reasons why merchants should are undeniable -- 3% increase in bottomline, fast payments, transparency, etc. the same cannot be said for average joe developed-world consumer. before any of that however, we need to solve the technological-economic issues with the protocol.

i think one of the biggest challenges the community and ecosystem faces in order to grow is its organization and political structure. how that is solved while maintaining decentralization and trying to balance the authority of computer scientists versus the opinions of enthusiasts versus the wisdom of economists... i have no clue but we're seeing that unfold as we speak. although, i like to think of the ecosystem as a newborn country trying to find a political scheme that works for it despite originating from lofty ideals. may follow the same road as most human political-economic organizations before it (viz our humanity), but i hope it blazes a new, sustainable trail. might be the beginnings of a global sovereign power, a world state, something never before witnessed in political science. interesting stuff.

i read a comment earlier about gathering up all the devs, ecosystem leaders in economics, etc. at a symposium where they might able to come to a consensus about the issues. shit, even invite the heads of all the major mining pools. this reminds me of the American constitution convention, where the country's leaders -- the forefathers -- came together in an organized way, face-to-face, debated it out and came to an agreement over the country's first principles. suffice to say we're still here and kicking ass 200 years later (even though modern day politicians shit all over the constitution). the ecosystem enthusiasts (us) would be quick to concede to authorities in economics and computer science, so i think this may be a good approach at achieving consensus over the recent technical issues, especially insofar as in this day and age and after the past couple of weeks, we have data to analyze for better resolutions.

tl;dr we need to hold a symposium, Constitution Convention consisting of core devs, experts in economics, the heads of all major mining pools, etc. to achieve some semblance of consensus to move bitcoin forward. it worked back then when America was young, it may work now (just don't make the same mistake of implementing a representative democracy) -- bitcoin now is like a young, global country trying to figure out its political structure. obviously, it would need to be livestreamed for transparency's sake. consensus will never be achieved without organization. this solution may be as good as decentralized organization can get. these guys make a decision and i'm sure the majority of us enthusiasts would agree with their expertise.