sure it's likely that the 25% that don't agree with will fall into line, but can we really call 75% a successful agreement
lets all vote 90%
75% voting majority plus a 2-week grace period should see a wave of laggards move across and the total becomes more like 90% anyway before the change takes effect.
First of all I think I think is wonderful experiment!
Me personally I see 75% as a threshold for "supermajority" but not "consensus" and I think the two should be separated into two different categories.
I think with the 75% threshold the risk is still too high to have a large section of the community that disagrees with the decision of the MINERS lets not forget these are MINERs that are voting here, and so that section of the community could threaten to split the chain in the event of a fork.
In the interest of avoiding this scenario which could be argued to be the DEATH of Bitcoin as we know it, I propose that 90% should be the threshold for consensus. As we have seen with the XT proposal of 75% fork, we see a VERY LARGE and VERY DETERMINED group threatening to split bitcoin into two different chains. This should be evidence that 75% is not enough for a successful fork, and we should all push for 90% agreement as consensus!