1- Yes, SF 22.2 prevented several accounts to vote for witnesses.

2- Correct. If we also consider that the same code also allows one entity to take over the governance and revert the whole thing regardless of the morality of the followed procedures. The code doesn't have emotions nor prejudice against anyone; he will execute things as he was designed to.

I must add that I am against allowing the code to do such things (preventing accounts to vote, withdrawal, power down …). As the chain grows, more conflicts will arise between communities, cultures, investors … One community could basically genocide a whole other community just because the first one is powerful and the second one is weak and doesn’t have resources …

3- No, their main job is to secure the chain and produce blocks, on top of playing a key role in developing and promoting the Chain. The interests of stakeholders will usually and eventually collide with each other. Giving witnesses the responsibility of protecting the assets (investments) of stakeholders will force them at a given time to choose sides, which is something we need to avoid.

As you can see here, I am making a clear difference here between protecting the assets of people by securing the chain and its functioning and protecting the assets of stockholders by taking sides and pushing HF or SF that will serve specific stakeholders or the people who are in power. Considering that those same stakeholders don't already have accounts at the top 20 like Blocktrades.

To conclude, the system of governance is clearly flawed, everyone knows that and I don't think anyone would degree with me on this, there are great suggest changes on GitHub that can make the governance more fair and distributed; suggestions that date to Mar 20, 2017, but were never developed because it allowed some witnesses to stay entrenched at the top instead of doing the right thing. I have no sympathy for some witnesses, but hey who cares if some low SP guy says something about governance, right?

Part of the problem of the Steem community is the unconditional and blind support to witnesses because the whole situation is so interconnected that you find yourself put aside if you don’t show your support to them. What we need is accountability, but no one cares about this, people like a good story about the boogeyman than dealing with the real problems.

They didn't want to implement such changes before even though the community was vocal about it, including me. They probably liked the status quo, I don't see many of them talking about the broken governance, see by yourself, they mostly speak about BS and fuel the drama and spread FUD.

I see it more like some people didn't like their position to be challenged by new potential investors. If they really want decentralization, they should push for technical changes that support it. Not whine about being victims. As I said before if you remove the biggest guy in the room, the one after him will become the next biggest guy in the room. Hence why we need permanent solutions that go way beyond Tron or Steemit inc or the current witnesses.