Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 09:51:24 AM

If the majority of those miners didn't accept it, do you think that we'd split into forks? I personally think that people will follow wherever is the most power offered.

The Bitcoin Cash “team” didn't want to adopt SegWit as far as I know. Who cares about Bitcoin Cash! Bitcoin is securer than that and thus, it's been seen as the official, beloved and securest cryptocurrency among all.

Would you live in a climate where miner wields a greater power than the actual users and having it their way? I wouldn't. Majority of the miners did not want to adopt Segwit and were proposing a block size increase. Miners started to signal for Segwit after it became apparent there was a threat for a UASF in the upcoming days. Bitcoin is better than Bitcoin Cash because the economic majority (ie. the users) favors it, which is why miners prefer to mine on Bitcoin rather than Bitcoin Cash.

There are plans for LOT=True, or at least as a contingency if miners want to veto Taproot.

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 09:51:24 AM

The nodes make up their own decisions, but each make the same decisions as one another. By running a Bitcoin node, you follow some consensus rules, but you don't vote for the security of the network (which is where the whole system depends on). Thus, you can be part of the Bitcoin network, but not necessarily with an opinion.

Miners are primarily dependent on the crypto's users. If no one wants to use Bitcoin, then there is no point for them to continue mining Bitcoins. In effect, the users have an influence over the decisions the miners make as well.