Why “the code is law hence no fork” position with regard to the Ethereum DAO is inconsistent

The code is law, working as written, not as intended, investors must accept that!” Well, let’s take it to its logical conclusion then! Ethereum , Bitcoin, all major cryptocurrencies allow the majority of miners to do basically whatever they want for whatever reason whatsoever via soft or hard forking. Trustless, immutable self-enforcing contracts are so only in a limited sense. They replace the lower level courts, but the Supreme Court are the miners. So human choice can override smart contracts, cancel transactions, return or block funds. It is not my opinion: it is what the code says i.e. the platform allows. If you loathe humans having that kind of power, if you want truly 100% not overridable contracts or transactions, you need to make a very different technology. This technology explicitly allows and empowers miners to act as a Supreme Court. Accept it or make a very different code. And this looks like a pretty good case for them to consider exercising their code-granted powers and intervent via forking, but the choice is theirs.

However, anti-forking “code lawyers” have a good point, too. If miners have the supreme overriding power – and they do, the code says so – it should be explicit, formal, and open for all to petition, to present a case for their consideration. We need a platform where everyone can formally petition the Supreme Court Of Ethereum Miners to consider raising the forkhammer to overturn a malicious transaction or contract. Everyone, not just the EF. This is how crypto grows up. Take away power from humans if you can, but if you cannot, and with the current code you cannot, then make that human power explicit, formal, and open for all to petition equitably: like a proper court of law.