Well, events occur and as they change conditions, governance should adapt accordingly. That isn't just a 'knee jerk' reaction or proving anything to anyone. It's rational response to changing conditions, when you strip pejorative insinuations away. When you think about it, there's very good reasons our bodies have natural reactions to stimuli, like pulling away from being burned instantly. Events that require action require action be timely.
Extant witnesses have adapted to optimize their positions to extant conditions, and as the top consensus witness, no one has done so better than you have, which you must reasonably concede. This is not to criticize you for doing that, as it shows you to be more competent than anyone else here at adapting to conditions, which is a good ability to have.
However, the prospect of adapting to a new paradigm regarding witness votes is at least work, and it is to be expected that as the top witness and an active dev you have plenty on your plate, so that prospect cannot be desirable to you.
I reckon it is necessary though, and hope you agree that ending the 30x advantage stake weighting is accorded through the extant witness voting paradigm is obsolete, as the instant ability to control governance of Steem it allowed the founders no longer applies to Steem, as the founders of Steem have all left.
It's time for Steem to optimize it's governance mechanism as conditions that affect that governance have changed.
Thanks!