I agree that removing the digging opportunity without asking to the prospective diggers (which is by definition impossible) is unfair, especially if this decision is taken from who already owns clams. I am not against changing rules on the run, but this one is special and surely this problem was not foreseen by developers at the beginning.

On the other side forking projects is a quick and practical way for solving endless discussions, and for what is worth I agree with it. In theory it is a 'safe' choice if services using clams (mainly JD) will run both coins in parallel. It's a bit a win for the investing side of a coin, rather than other wonderful features, but unluckily it turns out it's quite relevant for a coin's usage.