The problem with "give more hashpower" is that its expensive and doesn't assure the company that the risk of lawsuits will go away.

A better path would be to offer the a choice of a full 1:1 refund in BTC as if the sale had never been made or enough additional hashpower that most customers would choose the latter.

The problem is that the 1:1 refund at this point would be a hard deal to match and I suspect that many people now believe the original October claims were flat out dishonest, making promises of further hash-power later unattractive.

This is what I was referring to earlier on the thread about there being potentially no clean solution. A half measure doesn't remove hashfast's legal exposure, and a full measure may not be within their ability to afford.