The issue I'm trying to stab at very directly is that a drivechain implementation will not get shitcoiners to use a Bitcoin based sidechain.

There's another issue here though. I see the purpose of calling shitcoins as they are, a method of consumer protection from scams. To differentiate Bitcoin from these questionable at best implementations, is also a way of demonstrating the creditability of Bitcoin over these implementations to people who may have gotten burnt and would otherwise turn into "butt coiners" People who actively mock Bitcoin. If shitcoins and Bitcoin are perceived to be one (already a struggle due to "crypto" narratives) it will be even more difficult to demonstrate that Bitcoin is not like the scams people may get burnt from. Especially if the new narrative is that the shitcoin scam that burned you is vital to paying miners for the security of the Bitcoin mainchain.

This concern of course is only even valid if I'm entirely wrong about shitcoiners not even bothering to migrate over to a Bitcoin sidechain in the first place.