my gripe is blockstream loves taking softfork best case scenario and hardfork worst case..
but blockstream will slap down anyone that even suggests an opinion of
softfork worst case scenario and hardfork best case..
even though people like cores/blockstreams main technical boss(CTO) will happily bilateral split the softfork.
even with the 95% rule the network could choose to activate it at 90% just by orphaning the blocks of the non-supporters until 95%+ of the remaining blocks signaled activation.
i hate this because gmaxwell loves his monero and elements/liquid, aswell as his millions of fiat... not so much bitcoin. i feel gmaxwell doesnt care about bitcoins survival and has gone 'full wetard' into just treating bitcoin as 'an experiment' and testbed for things like hyperledger/elements.
yet people are following gmaxwell, because of old outdated stuff he done before he got into the bankers pockets and changed motives.
much like some people stick with the same doctor even if that doctor is now working for a profit making business rather than a national health service.
and allowing bitcoin to change due to human emotion of trust of another human. without bothering to just read what code was wrote and what the actual codes does to the network.
there is to much trust of human. and not much any care of reading understanding code or requsting the human to try a different type of code out of fear of being slapped by a human hand or offending a human.