Although - I do think I know WHY it is being done this way. Because Blockstream-Core Developers know that if they tell the truth, they won't get the votes they need. My problem is that when say Classic-Core is trying to do something, you screech bloody murder about concensus and take the moral high ground. And yet it appears that your moral high ground is really based on lies and twisted truths. It comes across as "Blockstream-Core" has decided what is best, and now the goal is simply to achieve that regardless of petty issues like facts. Just do it and deal with the consequences later is the seeming approach.

The BIGGEST thing I think you are missing is that at this stage, TRUST in the system is a huge factor. If this continues like it is, without someone coming out first and telling the truth, and saying, "This is a softfork but should absolutely be treated as a hard fork, and ultimately you MUST upgrade or your node will be crippled" then I can guarantee you that there are going to be problems, and those problems will get blown out of proportion in the media and the general tone of the community discussion, and if it is even possible at this point - even MORE TRUST WILL BE LOST.

I can also promise that there will be financial consequences, because guys like me will NOT be engaged in bitcoin during the time of such an undertaking..... we'll be parked safely in an alt.

ALL of this increases the odds of the much discussed potential "death spiral" scenario around halving.

And at the end of the day - this approach is not the approach of decentralized democracy. It is the approach often taken by dictators. YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND..... it is about TRUST!

I will repeat... help me to trust you. You do this by truthfully presenting Segwit as a Hardfork (or at the least with clear language that Nodes WILL BE CRIPPLED if they don't upgrade, and that this is a MANDATORY upgrade.) If you can't at least do that - they this doesn't need to be done.