Well, you're certainly the first person I have heard that said they "wouldn't mind not being in the type 20" if someone was doing something better/more/great for the blockchain/community. Maybe you should lead with that the next time? Haha.
Yes, there is evidence of Witnesses creating systems that benefited them(and their buddies) more than they did the community. People have the ability to see those types of things. It's a blockchain. Nevermind that some of it wasn't hidden very well. It's wrong. It should never have happened, and it certainly should not continue.
Yes, witnesses need to be "evolving, adapting and bringing value back to the platform". It is my belief that they have a responsibility to act in the best interest of the community. If they are not willing to do that, then in my opinion, they should not be entrusted to be witnesses.
"I don't think there was ever a plan for a true partnership to have both blockchains grow side by side even though that's something me and many others would have wanted."
I'm surprised that this is something that you and many others would have wanted. It's refreshing to hear you say that.
Maybe there should be some type of code of ethics for witnesses? And public notice if those are broken.
Really I keep coming back to this transparency issue. Transparency and accountability. Plus giving the community a say. I hate being told "how it is going to be" after the fact. It sucks!