yes i completely understand your points
Statements like only certain "active" accounts will get benefit is the most socialist thing ever.
some (retarded) _community members_ (not devs) have suggested to exclude inactive accounts from the proposed 1:1 nxt/fnxt distribution. i'm completely with you on this. its not acceptable and i would never support anything like that. i don't exepect that to happen. it would not just damage trust but also cause a community split. in that case nxt would deserve to die imo.
the other matter are darknxt, which could present a security risk, so i'm partial to the idea to exclude those. darknxt are 'dead' nxt, only protected by a 64 bit public key. they are for example nxt sent to wrong, unused accounts by accident.
i wrote this in my last post:
i personally think that the dev team is not taking the needs of nxt users into consideration enough
businesses are also users, so i agree, they should make changes with more care!
however lets not forget something: nxt is as decentralized as it gets. there is no financial backing by venture capital or companies, its independant, its not organized like any other crypto. there is no hierarchy. communication isn't streamlined. besides the downfalls i kinda like it like that.
in regards to business using nxt, yes we need more. thats why 2.0 was proposed. companies can spawn their own child chains without worrying about poor distribution, coin shuffling, or their users getting lost with the overwhelming gui. they can hand pick what features they need. for example they can keep it simple with token transfers only and they are on the safe side because those APIs will not be subject to major revisions.