Consensus hard fork must be decided by almost all the nodes and all the miners and not by 1 giant miner pool.
correct
BU is a damn discrete hostile take over, they are trying to fire the chairman/founder of bitcoin if it was a company.,
bitcoin has a diverse amount of SEVERAL implementations and has done for years.
Bu, just one of such have no intentions of splitting the network. bu are sticking to consensus as are many.
it is core that fears losing control and refuse to be a PEER ntwork along with anyone else. core want bitcoin to be a TIER network(upstream node).
core however should not own bitcoin because thats against bitcoins diverse decentralised ethos.
core didnt even exist pre 2013. so even core didnt own/invent bitcoin.
if you want core to be the owner of bitcoin.. then bitcoin has failed. yep even if core win, bitcoins decentralised ethos fails.
however if core just added a couple lines of code to be dynamic. core bu,xt, classic, bitcoinj, bitcoin ruby, nbitcoin, and a dozen others just continue on a level playing field of a PEER network.
if core refuse to stick with a peer network and enable their bip9 and UASF ban hammers(splitting the network).
*then if core have the
majority, bitcoin still fails as now its 100% core ownership and other nodes as low level second tier downstream nodes with no vote and just sheep following core.
*then if core have the
minority, the non-core implementations (many diverse nodes) on the majority side stick with a diverse PEER network. leaving core on its minority network alone as its own altcoin.
which is what they fear.
hence why core are begging non-core devs to cause a split so core can control things.. core does not care about consensus. and is doing all it can to avoid consensus. and cntralise their network. all for the sake of repaying the $70m+ debt hanging over blockstreams shoulders that needs to be repaid via LN fee's
