I am generally with you on fairness issue. One measure of civilization is how fair and reasonable it is.
But your sentiment
here is propelled by the same greed that drives all of us including whales.
If you recognize that, you will cease hiding behind elaborate "reasoning" supposedly for universal fairness.
Better world is possible but a knot to untie that world is way bellow sky planes of currency.
Interesting but incorrect in this particular case.
I have worked out that I would probably capture less BB if it went fair launch POW than I would by linking my BTC addresses.
I also do not find my reasoning to be elaborate in this instance. It is there is black and white for anyone to examine.
Sometimes common sense is enough. In this case rewarding the wealthiest with the most and giving the poorest the least is enough. It is just the start in this case there are many levels upon which this fails compared to POW and even ICO.
Also keep in mind that proposed per phase distribution allows for some quite generous and incentivizing dynamic. I am not sure if its intention or a mistake but think of this:
In first phase you linked 5 BTC. On 25th of december you will get something between 10 and 35 Gb. For second phase, your total share will be equal to 165-565 BTC (
10Gb/62.5Mb+5BTC -
35Gb/62.5Mb+5BTC). Against those who entered phase one with you, proportion remains the same. But those entering in phase 2 will have to own >165-565 BTC to receive more than you in that phase. Not to mention phase 3 etc.
Going from 5 to 165-565 BTC weight is some serious incentivization for early adopters.
This all stands if explanation from page 1 is complete, final and correct.