> Are you actually optimistic?

Not particularly. When I posted the request for comment to HN it got crickets [1].

Not enough people care about this. And the "safe" option has kind of shifted with the other index providers having moved first. That said, there were a lot of proposals and I'm not expecting all of them to be adopted.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48054324

There's no obviously correct answer here.

Not changing rules would seem quite obvious and correct at the same time.

It is not obvious that excluding SpaceX is (1) better for index investors or (2) what index investors/buyers want. Passive index investors buy the whole market. For better or worse, SpaceX is (will be) part of the whole market.

Most indices will be buying proportionate to float, which is probably the correct thing to do. Only the Nasdaq 100 isn't float-weighted, and there's just less money in that index than the S&P500 (even with outsized weighting, Nasdaq 100 indexers will buy about 0.5% as much SpaceX as S&P500 indexers).

Eventually buying spacex is obvious and correct. Buying prematurely is questionable.

It is not obvious that SpaceX's price will fall (and not instead rise) between the IPO and whatever date you have in mind.

A: This has not happened yet. B: Are you actually optimistic that it won't?

That's a request for an opinion, not an emotion.