Would OP_SUCCESS (OP_CAT) be spent?

Soft forks in the Bitcoin ecosystem represent more than just a simple decision made by miners; they are pivotal transitions that require the whole community's agreement on a new set of rules. This process, which is often misunderstood as a popularity contest among miners, actually hinges on the collective approval of Bitcoin users, emphasizing that miners do not hold a superior position in deciding whether a soft fork will occur. The crux of the matter lies in signaling, a crucial mechanism designed to synchronize the community on when these new rules should be enforced. The goal is to ensure a smooth and coordinated transition, beneficial for all parties involved.

However, signaling does not dictate the inevitability of a soft fork but rather serves as a preparatory step for when the community collectively decides to implement one. A successful soft fork requires broad consensus not only from the development community but also from the wider user base. This entails having full node software that is ready and deployed, capable of activating the new rules once certain thresholds are met. In the absence of such readiness and deployment, signaling for a soft fork essentially becomes ineffective, merely an act of virtue signaling without any tangible outcome.

The discussion around soft forks and consensus changes reveals a critical insight into the dynamics of the Bitcoin ecosystem. It highlights the necessity of widespread agreement and preparedness within the community for any significant changes to take effect. The assertion that miners alone can dictate the course of such changes is debunked, pointing instead to a more democratic process where the entire ecosystem's consent is paramount. This underscores the importance of collaboration and unity among users and developers alike in steering the future direction of Bitcoin, moving beyond mere apathy to actively shaping the cryptocurrency's evolution.