*sigh*
How many times does it have to be said?
Developers. Are. Not. Governors.
Please get this batshit insane notion out of your head. And I mean all of you. Everyone on this forum who thinks any developers are somehow in charge or in control. You are fundamentally and utterly wrong in how you perceive governance. If someone was using the issue to claim that we need to change the way in which the consensus protocol works, that would be a change in governance. Every time some UASF supporter talks about excluding the miners from the equation altogether and forcing a POW change, THAT is a change in governance.
A hard fork resulting from a significant majority of those securing the network (that's a mix of both mining nodes and non-mining full nodes) freely choosing to run code enforcing new rules is exactly how Bitcoin was designed to work and is NOT a change in governance. Stop talking shit.
If you want a coin where governance is dictated by developers, go away and use Ripple. You simply don't belong here.
Although I largely agree, it's unfortunate that you chose the term "governors", which can also mean a device that limits performance (for example, limiting rpms on an engine). In this case, "governors" does apply to the Core devs

, as they have chosen to limit the Bitcoin network's capacity, and no one has been able to convince people to overcome the limit.
Also, "Bitcoin governance" is somewhat of an ambiguous term, given that Bitcoin is essentially a computer virus that has "propagated" all over the world and runs practically without any intervention. It's unclear how this will turn out, because nothing like this has ever happened before!