If PTS still perfectly represent the early donations and the social contract, then PTS holders shouldn't have received any diluted BTS during the merger...
I agree with this.
I am a bit frustrated that PTSers want to have their cake and eat it too. That is, they want to both get shares in BTS AND they want to still be the target of future sharedrops by 3rd party developers.
It should have been one way or the other. Either PTS is merged into BTS, and now BTS is what you sharedrop to. OR, PTS doesnt change at all, but doesnt get extra BTS. (After all, PTSers back in February already got BTSX which turned into BTS).
That said, it seems the PTSers have won, mostly thanks to alphaBar's campaigning. They managed to get BTS and they are managing to survive and convince people that they should get sharedrops in the future, not BTS. Grats to PTSers, you won the merger and managed to get a slightly bigger share of the pie than everyone else!
But is all of this a big deal? Probably not, unless you are a developer of 3rd party DACs. Honestly, I think that the vast majority of the value of the bitshares ecosystem is in BTS, and it always will be.
If in the future, a 3rd party develoepr sharedrops to PTS, I personally will ignore their project. PTSers will be interested. If they decide to sharedop to BTS, I will support the project.
I do think it makes a lot of sense for developers to pick who to sharedrop too based on the needs of their project. For some, BTS might be better, for others, PTS. I think it dependso n what you need: do you need lots of users (sharedrop BTS). Or do you need a small core of developers (sharedrop PTS).