I actually agree with most of what you said. From what I read in your first message, I over-estimated my comprehension of your situation. You're clearly not a nutter and are very reasonable and smart.

You do have some points to touch over, and a little over-sentimentalism as you mention (reacting too much). Yeah, getting into politics and talking back will get you slapped, that's the nature of power hierarchies and abuse.

I also have around 15 accounts. I keep a few alive, others I have as backup. You won't find me criticising anyone big on my main account. I do that in private or with an account I don't care "losing" to downvotes.

However, all of that having been said, there's one main point I want to touch and that is the legality of contractual obligations. Particularly, the contractual obligation brought by promises. Steemit Inc. made many promises about the stake and its future. If you watch the video where the witnesses talk to Justin Sun, you'll see that he was not informed of these promises by Ned, so as you say, he was baited into buying without prior knowledge (or with false one). This does not make him immune to the promises, and according to the lawyers who have spoken about the issue recently, these have strong legal standing and Justin Sun's actions can be challenged in court if he's found to be "misusing" "his" (ninjamined) funds. So, regardless of whether he bought the company with its funds, he got screwed, but that's not on the community, and any use he makes of the funds to vote and affect the governance goes against the recorded promises Steemit Inc. made to the community regarding the plans for the tokens.

It's my personal opinion that everyone has been acting out of ignorance except the witnesses who, as you say, want to stay in power.

Another point I want to touch is the assumed future for the Steem blockchain. You must have noticed the recent changes that were brought to Steem, including the birth of communities, and the integrations Steempeak has made to the basic browsability of the blockchain. They have raised the interaction capabilities quite a bit these last few months, and if Justin Sun were to collaborate and act with the main current actors, these effects could be amplified and directed toward great things. If, on the other hand, he forces the witnesses into submission by bringing in more money and somehow keeping the chain centralised for too long, it is inevitable that there will be a forked Steem. The witnesses can and will take an enormous chunk of the community. Justin won't have to develop his own chain, he'll have to stay with the few communities that remain. The Steem currency will devalue incredibly in this case. The main one will be valued higher than the second one, but together they probably won't add what the current one is valued at today.

Sadly, no one is right in this fight. It's a simple struggle for dominance. If the witnesses win, they may fork Justin out, or they may get him to work under their boot. If they lose, they will fork themselves out and break the community in half. Looking at it from this perspective, it's a lose-lose, but one loss is greater than another.

So, anyway, I'm sorry that I spoke harshly to you, and that I made assumptions about you. While I believe in free speech, community regulation is quite necessary for blockchains to survive. You are probably an innocent victim of these policies, being censored for speaking "out of turn" or not knowing how to behave in a way the "overlords" accept. On the other hand, if these policies didn't exist, the place would be worse off due to the enormous amount of spammers, scammers and others that would find a home here. Again, a lesser evil, and one that I work around by leaving anything dubious out of my account. As the saying goes, "don't shit where you eat". This account is my piggy bank, can't have it be a victim of my own arrogance.