I'm having a hard time understanding the reasoning behind this consideration. The way I see it, there are only two fair options available that would have a chance to hold up in courts during the coming lawsuits:
1. Bankruptcy
2. Share the losses equally among everyone who held any funds in any Bitfinex accounts at the time of the hack / when the site went offline.

Every single customer accepts the counterparty risk the moment they hand over their funds to Bitfinex.
Bitfinex got hacked as a whole. NOT single user accounts due to those users failing to secure their accounts properly. The hacker just went after whatever funds she, he or they could get their hands on.
If Bitfinex goes through with their plan of taking from BTC holders to give to everyone else, I'll challenge that decision and file a lawsuit.
Obviously any decision will be challenged regardless what scenario Bitfinex ends up pursuing but as the MtGox case shows quite clearly, anything that benefits some creditors more than others will most likely not hold up. Whereas a fair haircut for everyone has a much bigger likelihood of getting legal approval.
Anyone interested in combining resources to fight for a fair procedure is welcome to send me a PM for any further considerations.
That being said, I sincerely hope none of this is necessary and u/zanetackett, Phil Potter & co come up with a "fair" or at least fairer solution than whats being considered right now.