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.
-snip-
This proposal, that creates more complexity in the system, needs its own thread though.
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.
That is definitely not the case. It is not that hard to fool people to support something (take Classic for example) that isn't needed/is unsafe/other.
If the block size debate has demonstrated anything, it's that there's a fundamental lack of understanding about how Bitcoin actually works. If you're going to the moon, would you like your spaceship built by a handful of informed engineers, or by the average tax payer?