When did you get the idea that I give a shit about lightning?  Of course lightning is impossible without segregating the witness data, that was the point of the softfork.  But the result was abuse of the witness section, particularly after taproot opened those floodgates.

I do not care about lightning.  If you can scale bitcoin without adding more opcodes going forward, good for you.  You probably can't which is why you, in your vanity, would attempt to attack bitcoin by adding new opcodes which will inevitably compromise the network's security. 

 The good news is that more and more people understand this position, especially with Saylor's recent podcasts where he says the same thing.  Over time it becomes more and more difficult to initiate any kind of soft fork attack on bitcoin, which is excellent news.

You can have 1 new opcode every 100 years, starting 100 years from now.  Plan accordingly. 

 I say we should allow protocol upgrades every 10 years. That should give us sufficient time to research and debate. In the meantime we just fix bugs and improve performance and privacy.