nope..
sorry but its devs that end up controlling things..

you only think pools have control because the DEVS programmed their implementation to avoid consensus and allow pools to be the vote.

however pools are limited by the rules laid out by the implementations .. these rules are programmed by the DEVs

..

in short.
imagine if pools with the heighest hash power all decided one day they would make blocks using sha-3

guess what happens.. the nodes reject the blocks
yep
even if pools had exahashes more than any opposition, the blocks they make would get rejected.

pools do not set the rules. devs do. and its the devs who have been trying hard to point the fingers at pools rather then themselves.

EG
luke JR programmed segwit to be pool initiated and it back fired, luke thought that h and his bscartel could easily buy the pools favour in the form of many all inclusive weekend parties.. but it didnt work

so then devs decided to make proposals of POW nuking, mandatory activations.. but then try to hid that they are involved.


..

in a better future.. what should happen is a 'reference' client has blocksize setting adjustable at runtime and the ability to download patches for bips.

then the network as a whole can just flag what is desired by showing what features/settings are enabled..without a 'reference' client steering in only one direction based on what the devs of that client think is best


EG
no more 'lets make a office word package that in 2000 only has embolden text, then later underline..
but instead a wordpad where you can have it all and choose what you prefer. and have the ability to download new font packs(smart contract script) without demanding of the main software supplier having to have it bundled in when they deem fit