Judging by the lack of coins showing up on the
bitcoinocracy polls, the vigorously attacking groups may not be big investors in Bitcoin.
Your incessant use of this canard only weakens your arguments. bitcoinocracy is no more credible than consider.it.
Bitcoinocracy is immune to Sybil attack, because you must prove ownership of BTC to participate.
Consider.it is so open to Sybil attack it might as well be a honeypot.
The former is signal, the latter is noise.
You're just butthurt the deep pockets support continued consensus more than contentious hard forking.
If Bitcoinocracy was in favor of Gavinista governance coups and contentious hard forks, you'd never shut up about what the "community" wants/demands/deserves.