I'm sorry this question doesn't have any answers to it, because it's pretty important, but I'll do my best to give my two cents.
Fork STEEM
In this case, I say no.
Why?
I'm supposing the question has mostly to do with the recent desires by some to lock out Steemit, so my answer is based on that assumption. If that's not the reason, or main reason, take it as you will.
Like it or not, Steemit Inc's accounts are theirs to use as they see fit. The people behind their eventual formation created the STEEM blockchain. They have been the principals behind any updates, realized or yet to be. Without them, none of us would be here.
That said, this goes far deeper than the importance of Steemit Inc. As far as that goes, I'm totally for them easing away like they've intended all along, and letting other entities, including the community, gain more prominence.
The problem is, forking Steemit out of the equation is akin to saying, "If we don't like you, we'll shut you out." Guaranteed, if it can happen to Steemit Inc, it can happen to any account on the STEEM blockchain, and for much smaller offenses, real or imagined, than what Steemit may or may not have committed.
The idea of locking Steemit out of their own accounts is wrong, and it's ultimately very bad for STEEM. it will have repercussions throughout all of crypto, and all this talk about STEEM tanking because of Steemit Inc. failings will actually occur.
As it is, there's nothing stopping the community from essentially taking over governance and other tasks, anyway. Ned and company might actually be relieved if a coordinated, concerted effort to market and develop the blockchain took place, as long as it didn't hinder what they wanted to do. And there's nothing stopping the community from doing the marketing. And given the right changes done the right way, a supermajority of the top witnesses wouldn't be a big deal, either.
Steemit Inc is a privately held corporation, so we're not shareholders of Steemit Inc. We have stake in STEEM. Period. We should have some say over what happens to it, and supposedly we do, through the witnesses we choose to oversee the updating of the blockchain and to validate blocks. Whether that holds true in reality is another story, but that's the way it's supposed to work. So, let's do that, rather than coming up with ways to separate us even further.
If there is a community on this blockchain, and it can come together to offer up solutions and then implement them, that is far better a thing than the blockchain equivalent of taking the ball and going home.
Interesting insights.