The main problem with this "revival" is:
if it is New Lucky, then it is incorrect to use the same name, symbol, logo and story.
It is incorrect to take over old Luckycoin web domains and editing old Coinmarketcap listing.
If the coin is new, then it is dishonest that domains, story, name, logo are not new and the same one with original LKY.

Not sure how many persons mined original LKY in 2017-2024, but in 2014-2016 it was quite active:
https://web.archive.org/web/20160413155222/http://www.multifaucet.tk/index.php?blockexplorer=LKY&charts

If there is a blockchain, there are certain immutable rules, no matter 1 person mines or 1 million.
If there is no premine, it is fair, all people have the opportunity.
If a small number of miners mine fairly, no matter - it is their own business.
They accept risks and have hope, expecting profit.

However, there are not miners only, but also people who were buying LKY on exchanges.
If someone makes their funds disappear in the new chain, it is a problem which will last.
The simple solution could be to make a revival from the latest block of the longest chain, and almost everyone here including nutildah and melander81 agreed with that.
It absolutely made no sense to make two chains instead of continuing the original one, there could be a fork to fix mining rewards or anything outdated, okay, but then forking from the latest block obviously.