This was my next (or second next?) post on it:

"Right. The 'trojan horse' term isn't helping proceedings at all, and we don't need any term to acknowledge that Elop has just chased the money. Whether that's being a TH to MS or just offering Nokia to the highest bidder is irrelevant, the end result (or initial goal) is hardly too different."

In any case, your posts were logical, but logical answers? I'm not so sure. From my own humble perspective, here's what would have been the best thing to do:
1) Continue Symbian. The N8 alone sold 5million handsets in its first 2 months, there IS demand for this OS and it's what keeps Nokia afloat.
2) Continue developing MeeGo.
3) Join MS with WP7 so that top-end devices can come out pretty quick, apps already exist, Nokia can hit the North American market etc etc all the reasons Elop gave for the merge.
4) When MeeGo is ready, release it.

This strategy is multi-purpose. Firstly, it keeps the huge userbase in Asia who use Symbian. Whether the OS gets phased out in a year's time or not is irrelevant, keep it going until you put something else on the market. This is especially important considering most of Nokia's earnings are from feature phones, not smartphones. Secondly, it still has 'live' OSs on the market. Thirdly, they have two high-end OSs on the market by this time next year. Destroying existing OSs on the market and putting everything into an unproven one is not sensible.