The logic checks out insofar as these guys (whether they entirely realize it or not) are arguing if favor of the instamine approach of mining a lot of cheap and easy coins really fast, then (once they have theirs), slowing inflation way down to boost price.
It's not going to happen, but that's the logic behind these posts.
For those unfamiliar with this coin's history, this was all already discussed. The devs wanted to implement a switch where all present coins had their value halved and the emission was changed to be 2x slower. This is the equivalent of having started the blockchain with a flatter emission -- the only fair way to do it while keeping the current chain. The plan was dropped because there was a backlash over 'taking half my coins away' (this line of thinking requires some numerical illiteracy ).
As I showed above, the inflation-related arguments actually favor MRO's curve because of the way the recurrence relation works. It's understandable if this is not intuitive to you guys because CryptoNote emission is so different from other altcoins. I posted some MATLAB scripts a few pages back if you want to check the numbers yourself and play with the parameters.
What we're arguing here only helps your value precisely because it screws over future buyers - i.e. not because of fundamentals but because you already got yours. This may be the flavor of the month in altcoins, but luckily this dev team is more ethical.