I did notice those words as he did keep going back to them... However, I took it to mean that past agreements, as known to him now, are not binding (even if they were legal in a blog post?) to him?

But yes, I do agree that the Steemit stake has never really properly and legally defined... We just chose to read what we wanted in what was said.

However, I'm not really sure what the end goal is if he planned to just dump the Steem? That in itself seems not as profitable as you would think. A consensus witness takeover also doesn't seem really required for that either (until the soft fork). I do think that there is more at play as well... But I don't see what the goal is.