I see your point. I really do. Perhaps there is a sense of "bravado" in my aggressive approach. Bravado implies lack of accountability, which is not my angle here at all, but rather more accountability in that a united leadership team with strong community support is crucial to success. I would, however, expect that leadership group to lead by example, and really disconnect from the old chain, perhaps not burn their stake, but rather use it to help fund the changeover at the very least.

Perhaps my "burn the house down" is a bit excessive or bold, and probably comes out of anger at what has happened. I won't deny that.

I do see your reasoning about driving the masses into disillusionment, which is why I believe in a balanced approach too, and perhaps @ats-david's approach is (way) more balanced. I'll accept that.

Perhaps the way forward will be good enough to succeed with organic growth which brings the masses away from the old into the new, without the extreme requirements, and pehaps burning the tokens won't be nessecary afterall.

I would classify anyone who has a go at moving the majority of the community onto something better as brave.... and possibly a little crazy, but I'm 100% behind the team which brings something other than sitting around talking in circles for weeks.

Thanks for engaging with me in debate. I appreaciate your taking the time to argue your point. You may have even cooled me down a bit to see the merits of a not-so-extreme move.

I concede.