I appreciate your inclusion and you sincerely helped expansiate on the simple word I started, which is, 'FORK'.
Fork isn't hardfork alone so we need to include softfork as another type of Forks. Thismay possibly avoid future misunderstanding about Forks.
I felt with all the recent happenings as includes congestion in network, high fees. One of the strategies that might likely be applied inorder to prevent a crash, is for developers and miners to agree to initiate a FORK in the system.
This is one of the ways at worst that could happen to users coins who invested in Bitcoin, right now. No need for fear of loss of the coins you invested or intend to invest.
I agree that the current event about network congestion is the sign that the Bitcoin Network needs an improvement. Bitcoin does not necessarily need to do a hardfork in order to solve the problem, I believe it just need some softfork to implement upgrades and updates. It may cause a split if there is enough numbers of miners opposing the said soft fork just like what happen during the segwit upgrade.
I strongly recommend to stop using references such as changelly for those who want to search for the correct technical information, their articles are either biased or have a technical background that is not relevant, so they may contain some errors, the same applies to investopedia although they are good in economic information.
Noted but in curiosity, can you find errors on the article linked using Changelly as reference? You advice pique my curiosity so I wanted to know which terms on that article is misleading.
Sometime softfork is better than hardfork:
I think there is both pros and cons of these two forks and I believe hardforks is done when there is nothing else to do to preserve the network (the last resort) due to attack, bugs or glitches discovered on the chain.