My issue was never with the ethics. Couldn't agree more, those who supported centralisation don't deserve to be airdropped tokens. My issue is strategic. I believe Hive would've been better off if they'd have been dropped.
It would've painted Justin as clearly the villain, and it would've given him no grounds to softfork out the STEEM stake of those top witnesses.
Now we're seeing Steemhunt freeze Roelandp's Hunt tokens, and half the Korean community is threatening to leave Splinterlands if it moves to Hive.
I don't know what will be next, but I'm guessing most of it could've been avoided by winning hearts and minds with a more inclusive airdrop.
I am not following this @mattclarke.
Could you elaborate a bit more. I am confused.
@mattclarke is saying that there should have been no excluded accounts, other than those of Steemit Inc. By excluding users like @steemchiller, all that was accomplished was further resentment, bickering and the loss of higher ground in the whole issue.
As a matter of strategy, I completely agree.
Hive would've been the welcoming chain; the let-bygones-be-bygones chain.
Showing kindness when you don't need to, is very endearing.
The contrast against Steem would've been black and white, instead of grey and white.
The sociable, "people-person" witnesses like Luke Stokes and Aggroed understand.
It's the coders who just see ones and zeroes; and don't understand enough about human nature, who pushed through the hundreds of exclusions.
Now they're repeating the 'We're holding it, but we'll let you beg for it,' mistake that they made with Justin in the first place.
This could be mitigated, for example, by the app sponsoring the request to allow its users to be airdropped their Hive. It would save them the their dignity by alleviating the requirement to "beg". Having the clout of a major dapp would also go a long way in having the community back it.
I wonder if some Steem members will now freeze SteemMonster, then demand they get their way, like children, or extortionists.