> And if you don't like Delaware established precedent then you can argue for the opposite in any other state (like Wyoming) where the judges are less bound to the established case law
Not if you don't like the established case law and want to argue for a completely different outcome. Which is just me saying the exact same thing a second time. Let's see if we get to a third rehash of this optional preference.
You do not want, at the same time, a jurisdiction that leans on well-established case law, but also does whatever the heck it wants because you're arguing for it. Not unless you're in a privileged position to influence the court in a way that anyone coming up against you can't, anyway.
There are a lot of things I don't like about Delaware decisions
I could play this game for the next 300 years before people catch on or fundamentally change anything about the nation state/jurisdiction/case law concept