We will mostly just have to agree to disagree about what is best.

However, on this point I must clarify:

Finally, public good... in terms of actual economics, you are straight up wrong

No I'm not.

Go look at what I wrote (I just went back and double checked). I did not say that "the API" is not a public good, I said that "API service" is not a public good.

The API (specification) itself is a public good of course. Anyone is free to use "the API", it can not be "used up", etc.

But a server providing API service (which incorporates bandwidth, processing, and storage) is absolutely not a public good. It is rivalrous in that people must compete to use its finite resources. It can absolutely be "used up", as you put it, in the sense that too much usage will degrade the quality of service to unacceptable levels. It is excludable in that access can be easily restricted (using, for example, API keys).

I'd suggest reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good#Examples for a good discussion as to what is or is not a public good in economic terms. The best examples are intangibles which share more with the abstract concept of "an API" and less with physical API servers:

defence, public fireworks, lighthouses, clean air and other environmental goods, and information goods, such as official statistics, open-source software, authorship, and invention

If I were to tell you "A blockchain is not a public good",

I was mistaken. I was thinking of read access to a blockchain, which is a public good in the same sense as many of the above information goods. Write access to a blockchain is not a public good. Indeed any blockchain which tried to be such would be spam attacked (as Steem was being when it didn't implement sufficient measures of exclusion pre-RC) and fail.