@Zangelbert Bingledack
Great post. I think you might be onto something. This has been pointed out here before many times. The term 'overwhelming consensus' is meaningless without definition. Yet more than this, the term 'consensus' it's self has been misunderstood by those that tend to use this phrase.
Bitcoin is a concens-atron it redefines the meaning of consensus in a distributed digital age, get on the 51%+ longest proof of work chain or Fork-off. The Network effect ensures all but the extremists come along with it. (but as it's a voluntary system even they are free to peruse their own fork).
you can see the Core error in reasoning here.
Let me try to explain again.When Bitcoin came out I thought it was an interesting and unique concept, precisely because I thought you required strong consensus in order to force changes on the network which effect a minority. This meant this new type of money protected minority rights in a way they were not protected with traditional money like USD. If Bitcoin turns out not to have this characteristic, then in my view, it is not sufficiency different from the USD to be interesting, in my mind the value of bitcoin in that scenario should fall to zero.
Trying to insist any prior consensus is required to alter a protocol that actually defines consensus is thus flawed circular logic. Fortunately, Bitcoin does not require consensus to achieve consensus.
I'd like to understand who the minority is in this statement? Presumably (BOFD) it is those that hold and use Bitcoin, against that big bad outside fractional reserve centrally planned legacy financial system. Otherwise it's the same mistake again: Assuming a minority should control against the majority in a majoritarian system designed to protect the minority.
However....
I had always assumed that if anyone does try to change the rules, without strong consensus, then many participants would rally behind the existing rules to defend the system. I have built new ideas on top of this assumption. If this assumption no longer holds I am simply not interested in Bitcoin.
Fortunately for
@jonny1000 you're in luck. Strong consensus exists within a hardfork. it begins within the code at 51%. After that the 49% are offered a choice stay with the larger, safer, more valuable network or begin a new. Many participants are rallying behind the founding rules. A free market for the blockspace commodity. Which is why it's been a misguided catastrophic mess trying to change these rules to a controlled fee market for blockspace.