Without going into a lot technical mumbo jumbo, when a crypto coin such as Ethereum decides upon a hard fork. It announces what it is, gives a date and the miners choose whether or not that is the course of action for their best interest. Usually hard forks go without a hitch but sometimes as this case with the current Ethereum hard fork, miners don't agree.
Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but to the best of my understanding miners and the content creation ecosystem of steemit.com split SP 50/50. If that be the case miners and the stakeholders on steemit.com with the corresponding amount of shares from most to least voting power should agree with a hard fork.
When the July 26, 2016 hard fork occurred how was a consensus made? Steem, and all of its encompassing notes, is a more complex coin than anything that has come before it so the explanation may not be simple but there should be one. Perhaps this has been covered elsewhere but I haven't seen it.
Was a true consensus of stakeholders made or did the creators and a power committee of Steemit decide some needed changes be made and implement them without consensus? If that is the case, that makes Steemit more like a corporate site like Facebook and Twitter. I'm not saying that is terrible but it is not great either. I would say it would be like a benevolent dictatorship because Steemit.com is a really great place with rulers who care. We have a good monarchy but a monarchy all the same.
I'm not trying to spread FUD but asking a legit question and have any misconceptions cleared up if there are any. I am a born skeptic and the only way to get answers is to ask questions.
