I do not need to have a technical background to answer questions like "who decides" or what the economic policy and governance structure of Bitcoin should be.
Your wishful thinking is wrong.
Because the medium is the message, you do need a technical background to produce valid opinions about what Bitcoin "should be."
Bitcoin is in fact a reaction to soft-science/humanities people like you operating beyond their level of competence and presuming to set parameters of systems that would in an ideal world be completely removed from their control.
http://www.techworm.net/2015/12/hacker-ddos-coinbase-website-down.html (lol rekt)
Coinbase is discovering that if you try to destroy Bitcoin, Bitcoin destroys you.
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/3ya0f4/remember_how_segwit_was_presented_as_this_genius/cycaifu?context=1The issue with BU is that nodes can't actually process an infinitely sized block, so you could end up splitting the network by making a block big enough that some nodes can't process it but others can.
I don't think making it a command line flag makes sense.
Mike.Hearn@sigint.google.mil is discovering what happens when you call up full-retard levels of stupidity too profound to be controlled.
The funniest thing about "Bitcoin Unlimited" is that it's LIMITED to 16MB blocks, which is 20% below Gavin's original 20MB proposal.