A question about blockchain governance. My friend debates that Decred suffers from "tyranny by the majority". When the majority decides to approve a design-decision, it marginalizes the minority that doesn't want it.
Wouldn't that put Decred at risk of what blockchain governance was supposed to prevent, a hard fork by the minority?
checks richlist ====> insider controlled shitcoin * checK!!* :\ what does this coin BUY?? ~ nothing legit i'm aware of.. :\ grrr i call bullshit!!===>tl;dr= it was a phishing scam.