I don't know what the history of PAC is but what I say still stand. At some point they just reached consensus "thanks" to either super low market cap or/and a fatal flaw in the code wich required a hardfork. Wich is neither the case for SHND. The devs on PAC are not the "owners" of the coin the owners are the people holding the coin, the nodes and the consensus on the market. A dev can only offer "enhancement" in the code and see if the community follows him. It's how open source works too.

Bumba was the unofficial dev for SHND for a long time thanks to him. But the title of this thread is a bit misleading it was created after the big surge in price to a 40M+$ market cap with a worldwide community (or users). So you can't claim a community take over on a very alive coin with multiple languages users on BTCtalk just like this (not anymore). You don't revive an alive coin.

Here SHND is working well with activity on the market. So noone will burn the coin swap it or "update" to a newer version if they are satisfied with the current one. You can't force consensus in a distribued ledger system. Otherwise it's not really you know... decentralized.
If you have a different vision you do as BTCCash did: snapshot and then issue the new coin for free and let the market decides the faith of both  coins (or way more now in BTC's case).
TLDR: if SHND is working well how can you force nodes to change version (requiring HF) if they don't want ? Answer: you can't. See BTC in 2017.