The free market will decide. That's one of the reasons it has the license it does.
I suppose you are right, but forking every time someone doesn't get their way sets a bad precedence for the future. Furthermore, simply talking about forking Bitshares is certain to negatively affect the price. I see all time lows for Bitshares in the near future, and I am glad I don't own any at the moment. Bytemaster's dilution-subsidized liquidity provisions will have less of a negative effect on the price than a Bitshares fork will.
I suggest implementing Tonyk's idea on the main Bitshares chain or not implementing at all. Forking Bitshares is bad for both parties involved as it is unclear whether a fork of Bitshares will have sufficient liquidity to function as Tonyk's proposal intends, and forking Bitshares is bad for Bitshares. Then again, you guys have never listened to me ever so carry on I suppose. Ironically, I got booed off the forums when I tried to stand up against dilution when BM first proposed it, and now all of you have your panties in a wad because of it.