And the average block is still less than half full.

It was discussed since 2010. Not sure I see your point.

I'd be happy if they come to some form of agreement at the second workshop. The website does not suggest that this will happen - the statement that absolutely no decisions are made at workshops (plural) seems definitive.
Still, it may be that whoever wrote the website FAQ isn't really representative of what the attendees will do or want. From the outside looking in, it doesn't seem like a great start. But perhaps things will happen anyway, despite the public statements of some of the attendees.
Regardless, the underlying problems remain. Gavin was having private discussions with some of the signers of this letter months ago, or trying to. So was I. Back in April I asked Wladimir privately what his proposed timeline was for a block size increase, and on that same thread Gavin proposed a one-time bump to 20mb with no further increases (as he'd tested that already). Wladimir didn't even bother replying to us.
Gavin also tried talking to Gregory Maxwell in private. So have I. He simply doesn't respond to our emails either.
There is just no way this project can be credible when key players are signing open letters saying they want some kind of amazing consensus building process .... and yet refuse to even reply to emails from developers who have been contributing to Bitcoin for longer than they have even been around.

Such a reckless approach to scaling will never be supported by those who have a real stake in bitcoin.

and how do you DoS attack? by spamming.