The type of language that some are using has been entirely tribal, around this issue and even more broadly in the community.

Daz 3D is mainly a content provider, but you are delineating them as Anti-Poser for some reason, I suspect mainly because they are not your own particular "tribe". The same way as others label Renderosity as being Anti Poser because of the recent surge of Daz Studio content in the marketplace here. Could you please tell me why would Daz 3D benefit from Poser's demise if they make the bulk of their profit through the sale of content and not software, from a vendor base that is free to create content for any platform they choose or prefer? There is no pressure on Daz 3D PA's to abandon Poser support it's entirely their own choice to support of not. There are numerous vendors at Daz 3D currently releasing content for Poser specific use and I'm sure they will continue to do so as long as these products see support from the community.

I can however see quite clearly the benefit of third party communities vilifying Daz 3D to aid in their own tribes commercial interests though. Even to the point where they may seem to be encouraging the abandonment of CA's that have chosen to sell Poser content with Daz3D into the future. And in effect decrease the broader level of Poser support across the community.

My point was that playing a blame game rarely has any positive results, and it may actually increase the amount and the severity of the fractures that are eroding the foundations of the structure that you're attempting to protect.