An important and compelling argument against the BIP110 soft fork is that it sets a dangerous precedent by allowing a minority to push through changes. However, this argument has two weak points. First, BIP110 supporters are not necessarily a minority. Most Bitcoiners are likely either not informed enough about the proposal or simply not interested, making them effectively neutral. The relevant question is therefore: how large is the anti-BIP110 camp compared to the pro-BIP110 camp? While this is difficult to answer with certainty, the available evidence suggests that the pro camp is larger than the anti camp. If so, it cannot reasonably be described as a minority. This is especially notable given the censorship on many of the most relevant Bitcoin discussion platforms. Second, even if BIP110 supporters were ultimately found to be a minority relative to the anti-BIP110 camp, that outcome would have to be viewed in the context of the extensive censorship they faced. As @hodlonaut clearly documented, freedom of speech on the issue was not intact. Therefore, the “minority” argument is only persuasive if both sides had a fair opportunity to present their case, which was demonstrably not the case.