the fact that ppl bought the coin is something not nothing. most ppl will not get involved actively. they took the initiative to buy/mine the coin. they spent money. its like ppl who bought bitcoin very early and got lucky. they didnt do diddle either but at least they got in early and got rich.
ppl who bought or mined dvc early should be compensated 100% for believing in this coin if we swap.
Then the obvious retort is to ask why we deserve a bailout for a losing choice?
Otherwise, many perhaps most dvc holders 'earned' rather than bought them. As mmpool outlines, Devcoin's rationale is different to most. The mechanics were wrong but a bailout would take failed methodology (for reasons where we may disagree) and again underwrite it in a new endeavour. That's asking for more of the same.
How to differentiate between varying interest? I have no idea, but that's one reason I doubt a new coin forcing deletion of the old is a good idea. Another is swap-or-not is secondary to successful mechanics and incentives.