1/ "What do you think of Decred?" --> Never looked into it, and definitely don’t plan to, but after a brief look at landing page, looks like another Tezos-alike. Solving a non-existent, imagined “problem”. 
2/ Lack of explicit governance is a feature not a problem. Introducing explicit governance, especially objective majority-rules voting is antithetical to bitcoin and any other digital currency that cares about being sound money.
3/ If an x% of stakeholders (or worse, an x% of coins) are making decisions for you, then you are not autonomous or self-ruling.
4/ I prefer @pierre_rochard's description of bitcoin's governance as P2P network governance, rather than the oft heard claim that bitcoin has zero governance.
5/ From the Wiki: Governance networks involve a large number of *interdependent actors who interact with each other in order to produce an outcome.*
6/ Governance networks are based on negotiation rationality *as opposed to the substantial rationality that governs state rule and the procedural rationality that governs market competition.*
7/ Compliance is ensured through *trust and political obligation* which, over time, becomes *sustained by self-constituted rules and norms*.
8/ The "self-constituted rules and norms" sound similar to the "social contract" @adam3us refers to here:
