https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_bitcoin
Quote
On 6 August 2010, a major vulnerability in the bitcoin protocol was spotted. Transactions weren't properly verified before they were included in the transaction log or blockchain, which let users bypass bitcoin's economic restrictions and create an indefinite number of bitcoins. On 15 August, the vulnerability was exploited; over 184 billion bitcoins were generated in a transaction, and sent to two addresses on the network. Within hours, the transaction was spotted and erased from the transaction log after the bug was fixed and the network forked to an updated version of the bitcoin protocol. This was the only major security flaw found and exploited in bitcoin's history.
The highlighted portion is essentially what has happened. For those that dont understand that a coin's emission and supply are the MOST important things for people to trust, I am not sure what to say. A coin that is allowed to be created out of thin air would lose a lot more trust than stopping the chain at an announced block in realtime and then doing what you said you would do
With btc incident there was no way to burn 184 billion coins, so rollback was only choice, but in kmd case there is another option
Why can't you fix coin emission problem, but instead of rollback negotiate a fair bounty for the hacker. In return he sends jl777 his excess falsely created coins which get burnt. Then equivalent number coins that hacker keeps is burnt from dev premine funds. Overall effect on coin supply is zero, emission bug fixed, hacker gets a bounty paid from dev premine coins. Much better solution. How can you unscramble hacker dumping of coins that will soon not exist after rollback? The rollback option is far more trouble.