Bitcoin wasn't created and intended for only rich people... it was created and intended to allow people to be their own banks and freedom of the Fed.
It wasn't and the rich people can't really force anything. There is no central authority. I've updated my post.
This is really not a good way to explain it. There is no voting whatsoever. Bitcoin is about individual sovereignty. People (who run full nodes) can't be coerced into accepting a rule violation except economically.
but the whole idea of this type of small group of people/miners making decisions about what should happen with block sizes and all pisses me off just as much as a small group of men in the Fed making crucial decision that will change the whole economy for all of us "ignorant civilians" that can't make a decision for our selves.
The
industry is trying to work with the developers to find the best solutions.
What exactly do you want here? Random aliases on the forums and reddit deciding? They aren't changing any fundamental rules, nor would the users agree on it.
I think this "industry", that I guess has been created, should propose a certain list of
electable proposals that people can vote on. Now, how we would be able to do this is another topic, and could possibly do this by a form election system that uses a sort of "block chain" as well. This way people can see, verify, and confirm votes that are being submitted.
I feel the best way to do this is to hold an "election" of some sort, and probably would be better to do all of this before the halving begins in the summer. I just feel that this is the best solution to all of this... Then, whenever bitcoin reaches another problem in the future, devs can then hold another "election", and so on.
People who are on here and pay attention to bitcoin in general aren't stupid... I feel that when deciding between multiple block size proposals, a democratically elected proposal is the best choice.