“For instance, I did not participate because the side I was supporting had already been winning by a huge margin.”

I’m guessing that one of the ways you were able to garner which side was winning was by looking at many of the mining pools’ statistics pre-fork.

One might argue that these numbers helped push people to conform to majority opinion, which is referred to as the “bandwagon effect”. This ultimately undermines minority opinion support.

It seems to me that the choice between two distinct Ethereum chains might represent a more democratic choice.

I would also posit that thought leaders within the Ethereum space vocally advocating for a fork also had a large influence on the outcome. Perhaps not saying anything might have led to a more representative outcome.

Now people have the choice between the two chains, albeit one without the original creators; however, if the ETC ecosystem successfully maintains what has already been created, creates a vision, and stands by its value proposition, it may attract some of the participants (including high profile devs) who originally flocked to ETH based on those tenets.

When it comes to deciding which chain to support, one should simply follow their conscience and values, but of course without being self-righteous about it. We all have different opinions about how to move forward. Let’s maintain our decency and wish one another the best in this great experiment.

Live and let live!