I didnt realize I wrote this 6k word post twice lol. My other one was talking about BTC and how even if you have 51% of the hashrate you could not take over the BTC name with hashrate alone. This is purely a social construct as no one would accept a BTC hardfork, it was forked only once in the early days (the BTC name being retained) but now that is seen as an attack. I'll need to release that as another blog tho its pretty wordy as well.
Well my point is Hive has the same kinda social construct, not with forking we are very fork friendly, but with consensus ranking. If youre a "stranger" and shoot into the top ranks with few votes, that is seen as an attack and if many pop up its a hostile takeover attempt. So you can see even naturally we are resistant to takeover by our built in reputation system, IE you need to have a good rep to be voted into high ranks of consensus witnesses. By adding Vitaliks idea of the lock up for gov changes you get a very powerful failsafe. Someone shoots into consensus, cant change anything right away, heavily scrutinized and can be frozen or booted out if its proven its an attack.