“The market decided” is one of those phrases people use when they wish to conceal the rather embarrassing fact that particular people made particular choices.

Markets do not possess minds, hands or GitHub accounts. They do not write code, merge commits, alter validation rules or deploy protocol changes. They coordinate exchange through prices. That is quite different from governing software.

Buying with one’s money may express preference among products already available. It does not amend a protocol. A dollar does not cast a ballot inside source code, and a price movement does not explain who possessed the authority to alter the rules.

Protocol changes require governance.

Someone proposes the change. Someone writes it. Someone reviews it. Someone merges it. Someone distributes it. Operators, miners, exchanges and custodians then decide whether to adopt it. These are acts by identifiable individuals exercising varying degrees of control and power.

The change did not occur because “the market” wanted it, needed it or whispered instructions through the price chart. It occurred because people with influence chose to make it occur.

A soft fork is especially revealing. It does not generously enlarge the range of permissible behaviour. It narrows it. It takes conduct previously accepted under the existing rules and declares part of it invalid. It is governance through restriction, made charming by a name that sounds like cutlery for infants.

One may argue that the change was sensible. One may argue that adoption was widespread. One may even argue that refusal remained technically possible.

What one cannot honestly claim is that nobody governed.

“The market decided” is not an explanation. It is institutional power wearing an invisibility cloak.

Markets coordinate choices.

People change rules.

And whenever someone insists that the rules changed without anyone exercising power, look carefully for the person holding the pen.