You may have helped them along by pointing out their flaws in public. If their system is flawed, you should've let them figure out the hard way. The consumer and the market will figure out very fast which is a better system. I do understand you are probably looking for more investments and attention but going on the attack before either of you have released your product only benefits the people already in your camp and may make the outsiders wait to see who survives before investing in the ideas.
I also understand the ex CEO is on their team now and there may be bad blood between you guys. I think all focus should be on Bitshares release. These pokes at the competitor may not be so becoming.
I disagree. It's not a case of Vitalik, going, 'dang! I didn't think of that, ha ha thanks!' These exchanges are for the benefit of us the audience. The weak spots are known to him. Personally I think it's about communicating and explaining that those are indeed weak spots and showing an audience that even when challenged with them directly, a satisfactory response is not forthcoming.
It's like central banking and the debt based money system. It's obviously a bad system, but confronting central bankers in a public exchange about it, wouldn't cause them to go - 'Oh, oops we made a mistake, thanks, let's go back to gold' - it would merely help to educate the public on it's flaws and demonstrate that they don't have satisfactory answers. Without these kind of exchanges, the public may use an inferior system simply because they don't understand how it is flawed/exploiting them.