You bring up all valid points. To play devils advocate:

• The Ethereum Foundation didn't create theDAO, though I agree they were too involved.

• I'd say "code is law" is still in effect. Sure, this was broken with the HF, but going forward, I doubt we'll have the same opportunity to play this card again. I see the HF as really only being possible at this point in time where specific variables aligned to make it a reality. A precedent might have technically been set, but since future attacks will have completely different variables, I don't think that argument holds any weight.

• I agree that the forks were rushed, but there was a valid time limit in place, being the ETA until the attacker could withdraw the siphoned DAO tokens for ETH. Given that time limit, I think they did a great job. Concerning the lack of consensus, I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect a majority of holders to vote. I don't know of a case where a blockchain was able to get a majority of holders to vote on anything. This is a governance issue that has yet to be solved. I guess the real vote is happening now on the free markets with ETC vs. ETH.