I would have to agree also. Despite the major loss to those using the exchange, there would have potentially been any number of completed transactions outside of the exchange. If people were using it to purchase goods/pay paychecks etc .. it would be brutal to just 'roll that back'. You can't expect people to unmail something, or just give back whatever now hasn't been paid for .. just not how things work. The rollback can't address that, so it's clearly a tough issue.
Bringing the issue to a larger picture, what if people were buying houses, cars, or other things of large value? The hardfork would put them in a precarious position that they didn't ask for. Do they give the money back, or keep both the money and the goods? It would make people face a very tough reality that they most likely wouldn't be ready to face.
I know there's more than one person here who lost money from gox, so I'm sorry if this topic strikes a nerve.
I thought some more on this. Vericoin is now PoS.
What kind of comparison to a PoW rollback can be made? Would it be easier to cause a hardfork in this type of situation with a PoW coin, or a PoS coin, to succeed? I really don't know about PoS, but at least for PoW I know a representative majority (>51%) of the miners would be required in order to enforce the hardfork. Does this same logic follow suit with those that stake their coins, where 51% of the stake will be required to consent in order to enforce the hark fork? Or can the developers just pick a point and roll it back, making the previous fork impossible to use without consensus?
as usual: the only thing the devs can change is code. nothing else. they cant force you to take another bin. what they are planning is: create a new coin with the same name and add a premine which honors current holders.
miners can do more. and in this case miners are stake holder. given that the thief controls 33% he just needs 22% more to reverse himself
sorry, i just walked by and saw this topic... couldnt resist to make this comment also:
POS in generally is flawed.... did you now that its enough to hold 51% of all coins in the past to trick new clients in to another view of the network... you cant just secure something with itself (imagine a locked box, with the key inside).
the invention of satoshi is NOT blockchain technology (merkle trees and chained data structures exist for a while) his invention is Proof of Work - and to implement a key to the lock which is outside of the system itself (the key is time in this case; something a pc has not a real networkwide provable clue about)...
