There are many things you can criticize a free software project for, but the argument that people who aren't contributors or disagree with the project's vision should be able to dictate major decisions is, uh, interesting.
I'd be *very* curious to see some concrete examples of projects where this is supposedly possible.
Free software is largely built and maintained by people working on it in their free time.
Unless those people are convinced something is a good idea it's not going to happen, no matter how many non-contributors want it.
@tbernard Are you sure Free Software is largely built and maintained by people working on their free time? There are an awful lot of Free Software projects where people are paid to work on them. Then there is support from Linux Foundation, GNOME Foundation, Tidelift, Open Collective, Patreon, Purism, etc. So there's a lot of money involved nowadays.
@jeremiah Most people I know with day jobs in free software still do a huge amount of work in their free time on top of that.
In fact, often pretty important things are done or at least incubated in people's free time. Employers often don't see the value in things until someone proves they're viable in their free time :)