"Elop wasn't the worst CEO in history,"
Of course he wasn't. He sold a business that had been in a death spiral to Microsoft, who actually gave Nokia a good sum of money for the business. He did exactly what he was paid to do, which was work in the interests of Nokia's shareholders. He realised that Nokia had irretrievably missed the boat on phone operating systems, and rather than becoming a me-too Android hardware maker struggling to compete with low cost Chinese OEMs (which would have been a very bad decision), he chose Microsoft's OS, and that inevitably led to MS having to buy Nokia's phone division.
Arguably Elop played a blindingly good strategic game, worked loyally and effectively for his Finnish employers and Nokia shareholders, in a game where he'd been dealt a really poor hand to start with. Given the lacklustre performance of the typical over paid CEO's of most companies I'd suggest Elop should be considered for the award of best CEO ever.
Those mourning Symbian already know in their hearts that the body was in the coffin long before Elop arrived. And if they'll be realistic they'd have to agree that had Elop tried to revive that corpse, Nokia's phones business would have suffered the same fate as Blackberry, of finding that after a year or three of developing something that was actually good enough to take to market, the whole world had moved further on, "quite good" was never going to be good enough, and the value of the business had shrunk yet further.