This is a poor take on how to deal with the tyranny of the majority, in my opinion. I wasn't saying it necessarily applied here, and was only bringing it up as a caution against absolute democracy. Here's a longer form example:

Say you have a software project that operates as an absolute democracy. Each and every new software feature that the developers work on is decided by a vote of all users and contributors to the project. For vote after vote, the feature "implement screen-reader support" is passed over for shinier and more exciting new features, after all the vast majority of voters don't use a screen-reader.

Wouldn't you say that it is fair if eventually the developers told the community "Nope, we're going to implement screen-reader support as the next feature"? Or do you believe the blind users should have to fork the project and implement screen-reader support for themselves? After all, they've been "free" to do that the whole time.