That’s a pity. Maybe it deprives me of a “learning experience”, eh. The question is, did you learn anything concerning the futility of the suggestion in relation to “war on hisec gankers” - which was the core of my post, it wasn’t about hisec wardec’ing groups ?
So you focus on hisec wardec groups, a parallel target of the OP.
What’s the purpose of your suggestion here, besides curtailing the list of active wars in current hisec wardec’ing alliances, as you would throw open the wardec mechanism and draw in more (inexperienced) cannon fodder, but never hurting the groups and individuals who know how to evade the mechanism altogether, and the gate campers between them and Jita ? Obviously you (I hope) “unintentionally” penalize anyone who is in a hisec corp or alliance with a wardec possibility.
A simple solution for the wardec’ing hisec alliances who want to continue their business model is to make more alliances. Those can assist when the wardec’ers get wardec’ed (!..), and they can expand the business of wardec’s on their own, and perhaps focus on the (thanks to your suggestion) easier pickings.
Alas there is nothing amusing to reply with. You’ve just thrown open HISEC to an increased number of wardecs against mostly the defenseless and the naive - even (and that’s not 100% clear from your suggestion) if you would still require the aggressor to own a hisec war hq. You may even have introduced a 1-man wardec possibility for “fun” prolonged 1-on-1’s without concord intervention. I doubt hisec will thank you for that, especially the new and the pvp averse.