I'll point you TPTB's posts about "economic reality". Trading tokens from one form to another may or may not change the economic reality. The specific mechanism being used isn't necessarily important, but it also could be. As I said I made no specific claims.
How can the prior knowledge that the investors will be dependent on the independent decisions of social networking users desire to sell their coins, be construed as any form of security-of-investment secured by expectations of AnonyMint's future actions?
Where is the security?
Work out the details of your own business plan, I'm too busy to dig into specifics, nor are my opinions even relevant. What matters is what you (and other participants), investors, customers, prosecutors, judges, and/or juries believe. At the moment I have none of these roles with respect to your venture.
Could you maybe fathom the possibility that AnonyMint is so clever he found a paradigm to legally bypass the very regulations he had been researching.
I never claimed otherwise, though frankly I doubt this is possible. Most illegal investment schemes (now) involve some form of complex obfuscation and the law is designed to, and does, ignore form (i.e. paradigm) in favor of a view toward what is actually being accomplished. However, the abstract law and what is actually prosecuted are two different things, and different people may care more about one or the other. Participants have to make their own judgements.