Rather than trying to shame the people forced to work around a ridiculous requirement, we should be trying to implement solutions to the problem.
I would say these 'gate hoggers', while not acting perhaps in the best interests of AE as a whole, are carrying out a strategy that AE in its current form is conducive to.
I personally despise the current gate situation - it allows those who got in early to prosper, and those who arrived late to the party are stuffed.
I therefore propose;
Multiply the number of 'gates' at airports by 8-10 if we want realism, 4-7 if we want to maintain some gate shortages. Possibly make this a world based variable. It is worth considering that if there are more airlines in the world, real airports would have adjusted their gates to suit.
I am aware this can be changed by data collectors so should be fairly simple.
Change 'gates' to 'daily slots' This should be purely cosmetic so simple.
Change the number of slots on leasing a 'gate/daily slots' from 50 to 7. This is possibly more technical and depends on AE, but it should be fairly easy.
I am unaware of how AE is programmed, but this should be fairly easy.
There is no reason that I can see that as to why this cannot be fairly easily implemented in 3.1 in its current form. If there is a reason, I would be more than prepared to consider a different solution.
If the issue is technical, I am more than happy to consider a solution that is within the easily adjustable part of AE.
If the issue is related to this idea as a concept, I am more than happy to engage in further debate.
The inherent thing we need to consider is that in the real world, 95% of airports fall to the demands of airlines.
Therefore, when I look down a list of all European airports, I should expect to see a small number of airports, like Heathrow or London City without gates, whereas the vast majority should be more than willing to accept the carrier that is interested in flying there.