Thank you folks, both hughbt and DesktopCommando.

I think I can see both sides of story, or at least part of it.

It looks like the devs have distributed *something of unknown value and usage* among the active community and insiders, and left regular passive followers and Coval holders wonder whether their Coval will be worth anything even if project succeed... This is a questionable approach, and will definitely cause problems in the future if project gets traction. From one hand, I could understand it - basically you want to reward the *active* community, instead of sharing value with some strangers who hold Coval while doing nothing for the project. From the other side, this smells bad, *might* cause some issues with law, and will cause some bad aura around the project, as many people will feel themselves being deceived.

From my own point of view, while I feel myself somewhat fooled, I could understand I am not an asset to this project, so it might be unfair for me demand whole benefits from developers' work just because I am stubborn (or lazy, or greedy) enough to still hold some Coval... I just hope devs will consider possible implications, and will give some value to Coval too, even if MBTS will become the main store of this project's value. That could be a reasonable consensus for Coval holders who missed on the opportunity offered to insiders and active community.
I can understand though also those holders who feel themselves robbed - probably they had more stake in the project and had better hopes than I did. In any case, I would suggest developers (and the ones who signed NDA) to discuss the situation among themselves, provide more information to the public on this issue, and dissolve some of the accusations if they are unfair. AMA with its 4 parts is long, but it misses one of the crucial questions, possibly because the questions were asked by the ones who actually got MBTS. Part 5 is needed.