All

If you change leverage ratios for the same shock stroke, you are changing suspension travel at the rear axle. What you're changing here is the rising rate of the leverage ratio, the overall (average) leverage ratio stays mostly the same. One logic would be to have a more progressive curve be the 'business' to prevent bottom out, but to give supple suspension. To, you know, race. Business. With a more linear curve, you have more support in the middle of the travel and have a more poppy bike. You know, party. As for stripping threads, that's not the point here...

I know, I saw that, I meant it's a proto in the sense that it does not represent the final as in the final product won't have that many holes or won't have them spaced so closely together. BTW, why would a less progressive suspension be 'business' and a more progressive 'party'? Wouldn't more support in the beginning of the stroke be more party? And a more progressive , comfier, but still supporting in the end be more business?

This is where you are wrong. It's true tall people will be seated further back towards the rear axle for a given seat tube angle (if we're talking about the actual angles, but i'm getting to that as well). And it is true, like you said, that only 90° seat tube angle would give equal footing for all people. Now, what my issue is is the virtual vs. the actual seat tube angle. You can see the seat post and the seat tube the seatpost is inserted into is relatively slack. And that it's offset from the BB. That gives...

I'd say it's a proto and they're giving themselves all the options. And will maybe ship the finished product with only two or maybe one hole but in different variant for the whole mount.