How BIP9 became a way for miners to prevent a soft-fork, not signal readiness.

[patrick.miller]

There is no doubt at this time that BIP9 relying SOLELY on miners to activate BIP141 was a mistake. In the future, I suspect a combination of MASF and UASF will be necessary to overcome the challenges related to upgrading and gaining consensus.

The BCC crowd voluntarily jumped ship, and too early in my opinion. They had a unique opportunity to seize the day by supporting SegWit2x through the Aug. 1st, but unfortunately they decided to fork off the network.

Ironically, it seems this happened because of BIP148. BIP148 didn't result in the network split anyone had anticipated.

I don't think anyone anticipated Bitcoin Cash would hastily jump off the network without any real discussion of the protocol.

Good article: https://www.coindesk.com/miners-involve ... es-anyway/