I’m willing to pay attention to your point, but please elaborate as I personally don’t think this is a problem at all. If 51% of the network believes something should happen, that something should certainly happen. If that leads to a fork, then what’s the big deal?
It’s important to understand that it will never be the only source of decision making. Talking of forks, people get scared of those but the reality is that they are a governance mechanism that can essentially bypass any stakeholders decision. Less dramatic but no less effective, developers have a large amount of power into what gets implemented.
I remain a lot more concerned about the centralization of trust around the governance of the dev fund, specifically. People receiving money from it have no place voting for how or even whether, it should continue. It’s obvious, yet, it’s happening today.
But I do share some of your concern. I think we, stakeholders, are winning. The future protocol change (PoS) is going to give us the upper hand and the current vote is highly likely to to give us power we did not have before.
I urge you to do your research on how much trust the project currently relies on, versus how much it really needs. On my side, because of that shared concern, I am starting to look into not just how to get stakeholders to vote, but also how to make sure they have the right, unbias, executive summaries they need to make the highest quality decisions. What I see happening on ZCAP right now doesn’t exactly give me confidence they are going to be that useful going forward for that purpose.