The only possible reason for controversy regarding brownie points is in how identibit is using them as a sharedrop target.
BM has emphatically stated on several occasions that his intention for brownies was to keep track of those who do work of value to make BitShares a success, nothing more. It is his personal scale of recognition. Please ground yourself in that fact.
Enter identibit and it's choice to sharedrop as a reward to those that help make it possible for identibit to exist in the first place. We can only speculate as to what role CNX played in influencing the use of brownies in the identibit deal. If it was completely and totally the brainchild and will of John Underwood without any CNX influence then any controversy lies solely on his shoulders. Let the whiners go take up their beef with identibit not CNX. However IMO the "whiners" don't really have a legitimate, rational reason for complaining (see below for more on that)
On the other hand, if CNX in any way contributed to the idea that brownies might serve identibit or they might be instrumental in making the identibit deal happen (i.e. without brownies being suggested by CNX and involved in the deal Underwood might not have closed the deal), then that is another story. If that happened it changes the nature brownies to not only a measure of valued contributors in the eyes of BM to a UIA with broader implications, especially if you want them as an investment vehicle (looking for financial ROI) rather than primarily as a measure of reputation and respect in the BitShares community.
If the later occurred then BM / CNX did indeed decide to "change the rules of the game" by changing the nature of brownies, and in that case there is a basis for complaint.