In the terms you use, it is not melting bitcoin or reshaping the katana.
Bip300 places x amount of bitcoin aside in a trustless bank, that can be taken from, if you want to leave the side chain project. Like using a house as a security against a credit card. It puts skin in the game where altcoins and other blockchains can just rugpull. This is the hashrate escrow.
Bip301 allows these other projects to mine their POW blockchain projects alongside normal miner block mining of bitcoin. This is BLIND merged mining.
These are two halves of DC and Paul's vision and research into what bitcoin could do. But we in the Pro-Dc camp would be happy if even just Bip 300 was adopted. we feel BIP 301 would be the logical extension for pow sidechain projects, but that can come later if it needs to.
Lets just focus on what Bip 300 enables. It allows the katana to keep being a katana. But after a softfork, (the soft is important because it means everything stays the same and is backwards compatible, like playing ps1 games on ps4) the katana is also now a machine gun, ready for world war 2. It can, if technology advances, also add surface to air missiles. This doesn't work with physical objects, hardware, but it does with software. We do not know, like the old samuras what future advance makes us, btc obsolete. Dc alows us a way to respond to these innovations AND keep the bitcoin we love.
Things you might want to add are a monero like simple privacy experience, or zcash like features. There is even an EthSide on Dc so their version smart contracts, if you want. All backed by btc.
if there are security holes or threats to bitcoin, technical arguments should be made on the open source proposal. DC has been around a longtime and these arguments have been answered for years already. All that's left so far is FUD. Big players stand to lose market share if BIP 300 is adopted. Names like blockstream and liquid (because its the same thing but open to you and not just big companies).
The project is open to real critisism, technical or game theoretic. But they must come from people who actualy understand DC first. Most people at this stage in the debate are dismissing it right away.
