There is a long time I don't write on Steemit because I was here for the community and not be used for the battles of money, between a guy (2 guys in the beginning) that sold an expensive dream to some investors and defrauded their expectations.
Like in "normal" society today, Steem money was always behind playing its war games. But a beautiful community emerged in the desert of mainstream social media with the promise of Social decentralization.

Some of these investors besides their losses stayed on Steem for the community too.
But they still have to take care of their bad investment and it's comprehensible the hyper reaction they had, that turned out to be the right thing to do for them and the community.
This new centralizing leader didn't understand that Steem is a total decentralized blockchain, that doesn't belong to him, the community that created the content value of Steem
And much less with the power of the money the investors and community expected to be used for development and not interfere with the communities ' vote for witnesses.
The witnesses pre Justin's hostile takeover, where the representatives of all the community, so they had to take fast action before consulting their constituents.
Communication and information is the key to Steem's community survival.
The speech of the vulture capitalist and actions are very clear, he doesn't care about the community, Steem, or governance, just'in money.
He doesn't understand that centralized rules shouldn't apply to this self-regulated community consensus, that was created to be decentralized as an alternative to the decaying centralized systems.
"Hierarchy eliminate consensus and blocks Utopia's realization."
The Steem blockchain is a platform with no private property and managed by all stakeholders by consensus of the community.
Here I leave some principles about consensus and decentralization, as a message for the community, that I've published a long time ago no Steem.

"Consensus is not possible in centralized structures. We can't solve social problems with centralized despotic authority, regulations and power clustering.
Consensus (consent) can only exist when:

a) - Everybody is involved in building solutions for the community;
b) - Everybody is informed with proper continuous feedback;
c) - Everybody knows the risks of taking that decision.

Consensus is a general agreement on a proposition to act and change the destiny of all the members of a community and face the risks involved.
Consensus can be "good" or "bad" because collective decisions involve risks that reflect in all the future of the community.
Any consensus in equalitarian groups can be right or wrong about the consequences of the collective choices and actions agreement.

Very nice and thoughtful letter.
Thank you @drakernoise