Bitcoin is not a good example, because there can't be competing forks on the protocol level. Once one fork "wins", the other automatically dies. Therefore, it's

Bitcoin is not a good example, because there can't be competing forks on the protocol level. Once one fork "wins", the other automatically dies. Therefore, it's much more important to get the right design, because individuals in the minority who don't like the choice made by the others have no way to change anything. Whereas a typical open-source project can, in theory, be forked with absolutely no consequences for those who remain on the original fork. Any change introduced in bitcoin harms those who disagree with it. The analogue by other software would need to be auto-updated software that couldn't be blocked. Edit: another difference is that if you fork bitcoin and mess up, it can be unrecoverable. It might crash, or all funds might become unspendable, or a couple of other things. If it shakes confidence, then you might not be able to go back. Also, you can't fully test bitcoin releases in advance because they interact with the network, especially for forks. So you might not know something's wrong until it's too late. While a mistake in other software can just be reverted, and can be tested independently, because instances are localized. (Disclaimer: I am simplifying a bit here.)