The point I'm making, which you intentionally fail to grasp, is that the founder's stake isn't just stake. The reasons it is different are the reasons it was prevented from exercising governance, and why preventing that stake from exercising governance is exactly decentralization, contrary to your deceptive assertion.

Sycophantic coprophagists like you belong on Tron. Pander to Sun there.

the only point is "who owns the key of that wallet". If this is just a question of definition and decision of witnesses and supposed to be state of the art - yeah, maybe I belong somewhere else (have no idea if exactly "tron" guarantees access to the owner of the keys ONLY).
If not this is just a fail by design.

If nothing more than possession matters, then society is irrelevant and the policy of lions and wildebeests is law.

The breathtaking ignorance of centuries of tradition and established case law you propose is contrary to any civilization above the law of brute force, and has no place in civilized society. Liens and obligations have been acknowledged to place limits on stake since the invention of money.

Ignoring this doesn't make it go away.