I apologize if this discussion should be moved to -discuss, I'll let the moderators decide, I've copied both.
And Gavin, I apologize for picking on you here, because certainly this carelessness in how people represent "facts" applies to both sides, but much of this discussion really infuriates me.
I believe it is completely irresponsible for you to state:
"There will be approximately zero percentage of hash power left on the weaker branch of the fork, based on past soft-fork adoption by miners"
Sure, the rest of the technical community is capable of evaluating that for themselves, but your statements are considered authoritative by much larger audience. In truth, no one has any idea what would happen if the proposed Classic hard fork activated with 75% right now. There is some chance you are right, but there is a very legitimate possibility that a concerted effort would arise to maintain a minority fork or perhaps if miners don't see nearly a complete switch over, many of them might themselves reverse the fork if they think it would be easier to achieve consensus that way. We as a community have never been in such a situation before and it behooves us to speak honestly and directly about the uncertainty of the situation.
And the back and forth discussion over your BIP has been in large part a charade. People asking why you aren't picking 95% know very well why you aren't, but lets have an honest discussion of what the risks and in your mind potential benefits of 75% are. Important debate about parameters of your BIP get lost because we're sniping at each other about known disagreements. For instance, I strongly believe 28 days is far too short. I think its extremely unlikely that those who are opposed to a contentious hard fork will do the development work to prepare for it as that may only make it more likely to happen. Thus if you did achieve activation with 75%, its almost impossible to imagine that if Bitcoin Core decided to come along (as opposed to pursuing a minority fork) that they'd have the time to develop and test the patch and roll it out to wide adoption. If the goal of your attempt is that any minority that disagreed will "choose" to follow the majority branch, then you'd be much more likely to achieve that by giving them time to decide that's what they wanted and roll out the software to do so.