I am not a witness, much less a consensus witness, so I suppose this statement has little utility. But with discussions out there and top witnesses implying their butts off that a true fork might be something they would pursue if Steemit Inc. continues to power down, I feel the need to make it anyway.
Just two days ago I made a post talking in part about how I believe in developing multichain projects, that my approach is going to be to spread my risk across multiple platforms, and that I like a lot of the Steem-code-based blockchains out there and see them as a great opportunity for multichain development.
Chains with a new approach or a new philosophy appeal to me; I like the idea of trying a bunch of different things. I participate a bit on Whaleshares, and have a presence on several other chains, although time constraints have kept me from being very active on any of them. Subject to my own limitations, I'd be happy to join and participate and multi-chain develop on any idea anybody has for a new chain. Except for this one.
Not because I'm in love with Steemit Inc. They make a lot of mistakes, they appear to have no strategy, their decisions are rarely well-thought-through, and they just put out a vision statement that reads like it was written by a sixth-grader with a business jargon thesaurus. I firmly believe that Ned ought to find an adult to run his company for him, and am sad that doesn't seem likely.
Why, then? Because defining yourself by what you aren't isn't a sufficient philosophy to support a blockchain. This loosely-proposed Chain of No-Homers has nothing going for it. Steem's philosophy is already nebulous enough without splitting off a new chain whose purpose is merely getting rid of Ned. A chain founded on the principle of No-Homers can only ever be a Chain of No-Homers, nothing greater.
And that's not worth my time, or yours.