Because there is nothing to nip in the bud. On july 4th they can see how their votes have stacked up with everyone elses and see where the witness list lies. Nothing else requires any sort of action. If the whales are not happy with that they go. But it was not because they were somehow duped or fraud-ed. Nothing was hidden it was said from the beginning. The code is there and tells the story it is their on negligence if they did not read it and for some reason stupidly believed just because they have a big stake they get their way or can push things how they want it.
They have their freedom of speech and freedom of vote. I don't think blurt as it stands can even be sued. But some whales are individuals and could be sued for libel, and false accusation of fraud if it hurts the community and business.
This is the FUD of some cry babies and really not that serious and I wish you could take your amazing energy in another direction with this one.
In short they dont need to nip anything in the bud because the cry babies are allowed to cry on blurt even if all it is, is spilt milk and misunderstandings about some of the safeguards built into blurt to keep cry babies from spoiling everything.
I think you should see the whole thing as a net positive for the platform not a negative.
Also why are you asking for a vote, only for clarification. To me it is already clear. Next month the regent vote wont mean anything for witness votes. Peoples stakes will determine that. The weight of the stakes and voting probably loosely resemble the top 30 already so little with change.
I don't think we ask for a vote that could cause more issue on the chain if there is no problem to be fixed. The only issue is that blurt is more susceptible to a whale attack on witnesses, but so far beyond founders and foundation member I dont think there is a vote big enough to change things for a single user or outside cabal. Maybe if binance wanted to come in here and stir things up with a powerup then we might be a threat.