...
Jeebus buck this is getting tiresome. Answer the flipping question:
Why do you think non-mining validator count has any bearing on a measurement of 'economic majority'?Read my posts, the answer is there.
Because they can reject blocks and transactions that are invalid on the network. If the miners start pushing their own agenda and the economic majority resists, there is nothing the miners can do but to risk a chain split or follow the network rules.
Is your brain broken? You have done nothing to answer the question. The question is not about miners vs. economic majority. Re-read, absorb the meaning, and reply to the actual question.
Because the more nodes there are, the more node decentralization there is, and the more the network is resilient.
But you believe that only miners should run nodes, right? How is that good for the network where there is miner cartelization?
No. I never claimed that "only miners should run nodes".
I never said you did. But maybe I assumed that you agreed with it because you support Roger Ver, Craig Wright, and Bitcoin Cash. Sorry. But do you believe that only miners should run full nodes?
And again, you have not answered the question:
Why do you think non-mining validator count has any bearing on a measurement of 'economic majority'?
Because it gives the economic majority, merchants, exchanges and users all together to enforce the rules of the network. The more nodes there are, the more resilient the network will be. But explain to me why you believe not and why I am wrong.
Maybe you are also right that, at full scale, Bitcoin's consensus security does not come from the amount of full nodes. But we will never go to a point of "security at full scale" if the users' ability to run their own nodes are taken away from them, and to let the miners freely dictate consensus.