We also know that what makes Bitcoin relevant is firstly due to it decentralized nature and it ability to making international transaction easier through the p2p concept and that Bitcoin has taken away the issues of unnecessary middle men and bunch of controls and regulations that's common with fiat or international banking systems
Tell that to users of centralized exchanges with mandatory KYC verification, who voluntarily agree to the presence of these intermediaries who cooperate with regulators.
Again, Most of those who have had bad experiences in the crypto ecosystem are individuals who invested in some altcoins thinking it has the same potential as Bitcoin and the fact that it's always a norm in society to call Bitcoin one of the cryptocurrencies, it's no strange that altcoin might have played a great role in reducing the level of adoption of Bitcoin globally.
There are also plenty of people with negative experience of investing in BTC and there can be many reasons for this, but most often its the investor himself who failed to use this financial instrument in a way beneficial to himself.
This begs the question, what if we had only Bitcoin? Wouldn't the level of adoption outgrow what it currently is at the moment?
Now we have not only one bitcoin, but thousands of unnecessary shitcoins (which will multiply). That's how it happened.
Do you think that altcoin is a major distraction to bitcoins adoption?
In part, this is exactly what happens, because shitcoins take over part of the
BTC capitalization, which gets stuck in useless projects and fraudulent owners.