Yes, and as far as I see it decentralisation and game theory did not prevent the seizure of funds. As such Delegated Proof of Stake itself has been proven a failure.

The issue here is that you see this as "seizure of funds" where few others see it this way. The game theory of DPOS naturally involves human perception. The vast majority of us do not see any seizure. Prior to the first Hive block, only Steem existed. After the first Hive block, Hive and Steem were created. The new balances after the first block represent new tokens which mostly but not entirely mirror the balances in the prior Steem block.

It has never been a technical challenge to do this. The security of our tokens is entirely in our responses to the action as participants. Because we do not see it as a seizure, people don't generally have a problem with it. Other circumstances would provoke different reactions. A seizure of Hive without the creation of new tokens, a new brand and chain etc. has very different game theory outcomes. Most people here don't see it the way you do because we don't see a seizure having happened in the first place.