Source :
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/increased-politicization-bitcoin-mining-distraction/The main issue with the concept of mining pools choosing to promote a specific vision for Bitcoin’s consensus rules is that these actions have no bearing on what will happen once a new, forked version of Bitcoin is available to trade against the original version of Bitcoin. While miners can indicate their support for a specific proposal, it’s the users who will decide whether a successful hard fork has happened, an altcoin has been created or the new version of Bitcoin has any support at all.
On top of that, it is oftentimes difficult to tell the difference between a hard fork and an altcoin at first glance.
Miners are in the business of Bitcoin to earn block rewards, including transaction fees. When a hard-forking change to Bitcoin is attempted, the end result is two digital currency networks by default (the original network without the rule changes and the new network with the proposed upgrades).
Instead of enforcing rules on users, miners should respond to profit incentives. If a hard fork is activated and users remain on the original chain (thus assigning more value to the block rewards on that chain), miners will follow the more lucrative block reward and stick with the original chain as well — or waste money.
Très bon article qui couvre tout le débat entre hard-fork voulu et soft-fork appuyé par les mises à jours du client Bitcoin Core, fondamentalement à l'origine du réseau Bitcoin.
Il fait aussi un point sur le "bordel" du hard-fork chez Ethereum (et les pertes des utilisateurs à ce moment-là).
