I think it's important to keep in mind the mechanics behind what's going on.
1) BM and team are creating a new SuperDAC called BitShares that uses BTS as its primary shares.
2) To kick start this new SuperDAC they are airdropping 100% of the shares (2.5B) based on allocations from existing DACs.
He could have just as easily airdropped BTSX:BTS 1:1 and said, "Best of Luck!" to all the other DACS but instead gave them a stake in the new project via an extra 500,000,000 BTS.
From a traditional business perspective BM has gone way above and beyond what 99% of companies do in this situation. I've spent over 20 years working for big corporations; I've seen how ugly this can be when the decision makers don't care about those that got them to where they are. This is NOT the case here.
e: So many typos...
1. If it's a NEW DAC, then follow the social consensus assign at least 10% to PTS and 10% AGS holders, dispatch the remaining 80% to whoever you think it fit; If you think it's just a upgrade to the current BTSX chain, fine, just go without any allocation to PTS/AGS/DNS/NOTE, let the competition begin.
2. I came to this BTS community because I believed what was written in the original white paper that we will have separate chain for different DACs. And all DACs will honor at least 10% PTS and 10% to AGS, this was the consensus how I made my investment plan. And now you're telling me that everything is going to a so called "super DAC" - tell me what's the difference between this "super DAC" and Ethereum?
3. And you know what is more unacceptable?? That BM pegged PTS / DNS price to X price in the market using the allocation rate - and how did him get to that conclusion? by just an assumption?