The high price of SBDs has sparked a grassroots growth of the platform.

Is that a falsifiable claim or an opinion? If it's based on hard data instead of subjective perception, can you supply some data to ensure we don't fall into the correlation is not causation trap? Some argue the rise in STEEM was the real driver of adoption because that impacts the entire rewards pool, not just the SBD portion of it.

I believe if the price of SBD didn't spike, you'd see only a fraction of the growth we've seen this year.

Okay. How did you come about that belief? What data would you use to convince others of that belief?

I’m not sure why they want to kill what is the best possible growth acceleration asset right now.

That, again, makes a pretty strong claim. What if a stable pegged asset is actually a huge potential avenue for growth (along with an increase in STEEM price to convert into that stable asset)? USDT seems to enjoy quite a bit of use right now. I sure wouldn't mind the STEEM ecosystem taking some of that market.

The argument that SBD is far too small with far too few tokens in distribution at this time is a good one. It's possible any attempts to stabilize this coin could have unintended consequences. It's also possible it could jumpstart more SBD into existence as people convert STEEM to SBD, if that were an option. To me, that argument is more about when this should be done and less about if it should be done. If we could have a stable asset in SBD and a speculative asset in STEEM (which has a larger impact on the total rewards pool), that sounds like the best of both worlds to me.

I'm working on a full post with my thoughts on this.