It seems the community has some decisions to make.
1) Wait for the dev to appear and fix the code
2) Ditch the dev and get a third party to fix the code asap. Get a new committed dev.
3) Ditch the coin
A coin dev has a vision and commitment to make something with a coin. A new dev might be just a hired hand that is not necessarily committed to a coin's future. There has been exceptions to this though where a takeover was done successfully.
Due to my risk management strategy I am not materially exposed to emoney that is stuck in my wallet so I am indifferent to the option chosen. If it is going to be a lot of effort to fix the code, to hire a third party for the fix or to get a new committed dev, then it might be best to just ditch the coin and move on. But then there are many who are heavily invested with coins stuck in their wallet and their interests have to be considered as well.
I can lose the money if need be and take option 3), but I don't see the point in that, as I like the branding, a lot is in a name really. (Look at "Darkcoin") I have helped with a coin that started at 9 sats and now is trading at 150 sats. I run a community with 4300 crypto traders, and have over 1 million views on my blog, not a big deal, nor am I bragging, but I can provide some free promotions for the coin. My idea would be just to make it into what it really is anyway, a trading/staking coin, but maybe go all out with that angle instead of some advertising stuff? Maybe that could still work though, if there were a reason for people to use the coin a lot. Staking gambling games or something, a reason people would see the ads? Make it an honest staking coin, we have the premine, we have donations, we already have the Bittrex slot. We have people that want it to work. I can't personally fix the code however, so it does require someone with coding talent that wants to make some profit.