I was surfing my feed earlier, and saw yet another post on the Drugwars craze going around. It wasn't from the usual suspects on there, the title clever enough to get me to open it despite not playing Drugwars. You can read the article in question here written by 
While the damage in this case is spread out a lot more than the whole Dstors meltdown (which is still ongoing as they continue to hold the 20000+ Steem jacked from @Haejin), this one is sure to leave a wider bad taste in the community as it hit so many with the bait and switch taking place. Now whether this was by design or the (re)actions of someone inexperienced in the minefield of raising capital while appearing not to I'm unsure. Sadly, this may not matter to those in charge of such matters.
From the beginning, I noted actions by those in my circles that displayed a constant theme of changing rules. Always seeming to involve what one was supposedly receiving in exchange for their investment. I hate even using that word as the way the original scenario was set up, the most heavily "invested" players would be able to recoup their investment (at least until word got around to poorer players they were mainly to keep the funds flowing). And, there was the promise from the latest announcement that the pool raised will be used to give Steem back to the players in the form of upvotes.
A Word Of Caution
Based on my recent research into ICO interpretations, it would appear some of what they did may have been an attempt to classify this meltdown as an utility token instead of an stock token. The part I would be nervous about here is the promise to reward with upvotes will probably be able to be interpreted as a stock token, not merely the utility token. If they had kept everything in house (I am assuming they have already been issuing upvotes) and started with the tokens they are now saying will be used (and rumored to be built on another chain, which makes me wonder how that is supporting Steem), I think they would have been able to avoid any insinuation of it being more than a utility token.
Based on the misrepresentations at the beginning about this all being Steem based, and now it will be this new coin based, it raises the question if this was a ploy to raise a valued token (Steem) to apply to an as yet worthless token. I'm not a legal professional, but I'm not sure that it is legal to do something like this, and I wouldn't recommend it regardless as it seems that as quickly as this went from point A to Z one could easily conclude that this was a gamble to sidestep the ICO label with false promises to have some sort of initial equity to begin their new "utility" tokens.
Even If Their Intentions Are Good, Don't Expect Value Anytime Soon
As I mentioned earlier, I have recently been investigating what makes an ICO a security, subject to SEC interference. Also, what sparked this research was how would the side chain tokens being issued here through Steem-Engine work. I have seen a few tokens being thrown around here, with some form of valuation being placed on them which leaves me scratching my head as to the how and why. For the most part, they seem to be what in the publishing world used to be called a vanity press, only in this case it would be a vanity token.
To do an ERC20 token, and have it gain any real valuation at all (even if only as quick pump and dump vaporware as we saw so much of), one would have to get it listed on exchanges, preferably the larger ones like Binance, Hitbtc etc. And to do that, it costs moolah. The exchanges expect to be paid large listing fees to allow your tokens to be traded there. While Binance won't say, it has been reported they want 2.6 million to list your token.
https://bitcoinist.com/binance-listing-2-6-million-fee/
Back to the Steem-engine process for a moment to close this out. Being an internal market that is still in infancy and will probably never rival other exchanges like Binance, it would have gone a long way to solidifying the claims made that this was in some way about their intent with the Steem blockchain if they had chosen to create their Freedom tokens utilizing Steem-engine. It also would have been a huge boost to the chain, acting as a doorway for those interested in playing who were unfamiliar with Steem. While I am hopeful they may decide to take this route instead of the ERC20 route, it is ultimately their call in how they handle this.
I just don't know how the PR can salvage this based on the last months worth of posts. Like I said, not a player here. But every week has seen what at best can be called an inadvertant bait and switch, at worst a willful manipulation that was designed to pry Steem to fund a project to be ran elsewhere. We have seen this before, and I have to wonder if anyone with genuine intent in the future will be able to convince many people here that they too aren't setting up a dine and dash.
I wish the best for all of you who feel you were taken in by this, and it would probably be best in the future if something like this comes along you treat it like WOW or one of those cheesy Fakebook games and don't even consider it an investment. It was merely a pay to play setup for your enjoyment.