Well written and cogent — and I entirely sympathize with your position.

I think you’re being unfair to label this “prejudicial justice”, however — the DAO theft was the largest cryptocurrency heist Ethereum has seen — possibly the largest cryptocurrency theft full-stop, so the scale argument for impartiality is pretty high here: none of the other candidates for intervention were nearly so significant to the community. It’s also the case that the funds were conveniently locked up in a known address for an extended period of time.

I also think you overestimate the probability of future forks, when talking about unwanted applications and the like — and so do many on the “pro-fork” side of the fence, it has to be said. Interventions of this sort are poorly suited to most situations that might lead someone to call for a fork, and from a social perspective, if even the clear theft of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funds can only get something like 80% of the community behind it, the results for anything murkier would be far less favorable. I’m of the opinion that the DAO fell into a rare confluence of circumstances: unequivocal wrongdoing, that can be straightforwardly remedied, on a still-new technology. Those circumstances are going to be harder and harder to replicate as time goes on.