I think that it becomes distributed (or clean) when it is purchased off of the market. This way, anybody, and everybody had a fair shot at it. It also serves to prop up the value of the coin. I mean sure, if he dumped it all to the market at once, it would sink the value of the token for a short time, but that's just cheap tokens for everyone in the marketplace.

What Ned did (if the ninja mine is illegitimate stake) is equivalent to selling hot merch to someone who knows they are buying hot merch. This is why I see a big difference in icing out STINC and the socks from the HIVE drop, as opposed to what I consider "regular stakeholders" who voted however they did, for whatever reasons they did.

Granted, the blockchain is still vulnerable if someone legitimately buys enough stake. However, this is the central flaw with our blockchain. dPoS and decentralization will not necessarily coexist peacefully. This is why I think witnesses have to strike the right balance between the two.

Icing out Justin and the socks seemed called for, because of the "illegitimate stake." However, to shun the other stakeholders seems like an affront to dPoS to me. If we project too much of that kind of message, people won't feel secure in buying the token. That's just my opinion, this stuff is so occult, that most potential investors will be coming in blind regardless.

I bought into the lie that dPoS and decentralization was the inherent nature of the blockchain and that both would exist together in harmony indefinitely. If we're honest with ourselves, we will stop spreading that fairy tale right now. It's only decentralized until it's not, and we only respect dPoS until we do not.

That's the true-true as far as I am concerned.
I don't know if someone will ever create a chain
that fixes that problem and also serves to keep
people inspired to create content. But if they
can do just that, it's going to be a success!