I agree with this:

My position on the initial "unfairly" acquired stake ultimately boils down to being fine with it.

Especially since, as you say, their percentage seems to be around just 20 or 30% at this point.

Steemit got the biggest stake because Steemit took the biggest risk. That's how entrepreneurship is supposed to work. When they ran the so-called "ninja mine", whatever they were bringing in was basically worth zero, but they had already expended substantial cost and effort on development.

Frankly, with Steemit abstaining from voting, the blockchain has fallen from #3 in market cap to as low as #90 and the price fell to less than 5% of the price in July/2016. Far worse than the other top coins in existence at the time. Maybe that would all reverse direction if they were to start exercising their voice in governance and curation. Maybe not, too, but it's hard to imagine that they could cause the value to do much worse.

Anyway, like you, I've mostly stayed out of these conversations because it's clearly a minority position, but I am glad you posted this.