You’re not supplying any technical basis for what you’re saying. You’re just saying “It’s different” It’s not any different. Forks are completely new assets and using an existing userbase as the jumping off point is useful because that increases the chance of adoption because as I stated in my post, money is a belief system. If more people hold a token, it’s more likely some will value it. If someone is attacking the network and you fork as a response to the attack it’s completely nonsensical to give the attacker tokens. It defeats the whole purpose.
In the case of STEEM, there was no chain split. They modified EXISTING tokens users bought and paid for. That’s a completely different story and if you don’t believe me believe the lawyer that’s said as much on chain multiple times.