Comment: Like I said, one of us is wrong

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: No, they don't need a (see in situ)

Like I said, one of us is wrong

If it's me, I'd like to figure it out. But for example;

Hardorks only exist when there's a vast disagreement between the bitcoin users on which way is the best way to go.

That's a possible scenario for a hard fork, I guess, but there are also also kinds of changes that can't preserve backward compatibility that would require a hard fork even with unanimous support. It's not uncommon at all to see discussion of possible features / improvements and whether it could be done without a hard fork or not. Here's a page that suggests that alt coin developers should focus on things that would require a hard fork, i.e., things that would be very hard to accomplish with bitcoin:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alt-chain_release_RFC
There are a number of flaws with Bitcoin that cannot be corrected without a "hard fork". Any serious alt chain should at least attempt to address these concerns and issues.