We appreciate your feedback and that you feel your voice isn't being heard here, I don't think Ned was saying anything to the contrary. I think you can appreciate the fact that we have been inundated with people telling us how we should do things differently since the very beginning. How we shouldn't use PoS or DPoS, how we should have smart contracts, etc. People often point to the initial "unfair distribution" and I think Ned's point comes down to the fact that they never point to another established chain that had a "fair" initial distribution. They are all fiefdoms but NONE enable anyone to join and begin earning that same stake simply by creating. It's not a perfect system, but we would love to be able to look at another system that was "better" so that we could learn from them. Unfortunately, as you say yourself, no one has been able to do what we've done, so we don't have many people to look at. We are open to positive changes for which there is a consensus, but it seems that most people just want us to listen to them and no one else. My point is really only that whatever the history of the formation of this ecosystem, it is responsible for both the negative AND the positive consequences. Those people who were most involved in the beginning, they're the ones who built a blockchain that was able to do what "nothing in the crypto world has been able to do."

If you believe in this chain we are eager to work with all who help build a consensus around the positive changes that need to happen. I don't believe we have ever done anything that indicates otherwise. At the same time, we have no problem with people looking at other projects, participating in them, and lending the insights they've gained from a project that is much farther along and mature than they are. It's not us-versus-them. We're all in this together trying to build a better future.