People now need to do additional research to understand that you had nothing to do with agave and your mistake is not reflected in the work of the agave team - and the project is about to launch.
Your apologies ought to have financial responsibilities and public accountability associated with them. So that you take ownership over the security lapse of your private key, and the inclusion of the minting permissions in a fixed supply token.
It is generous and necessary for 1hive to cover for you now to preserve integrity in narrative for the upcoming projects, and is not an indicator of demand for dripp v2.
The damage of a rug pull burn in defi is an area effect warning flag. The security lapse of your private keys and the inclusion of the mint function is a textbook rug pull, and you or your social group are the most likely actors under suspicion, given the exploit.
To potential / uninformed investors in agave and honeyswap farms - this is an indicator of a lack of security and competence, which increases the risk of supporting these projects - right before their launch.
By not covering these costs and owning these mistakes yourself, you are forcing 1hive to benevolently indicate by its actions that you were a casualty of inexperience in a decentralized community and that the ecosystem is mature enough to where it can make good on failures (that are not even canonical).
The issue here is the cost of repaying the liquidity for the exploit and the public responsibility of the mistake - in a way that does not allow any fallback onto 1hive or agave.
Your shoulders ought to handle those responsibilities.
So if 1hive wants to have successful launches - covering your liquidity damages is putting out a PR fire and signaling that your work is not reflective of the security of the other projects in the ecosystem.
My opinion is that resolving these issues ought to be your focus, if you want to regain trust for v2.