I've seen (e.g. in Srednicki) the following notation for the connection between a Lorentz transformation $\Lambda$ and the Lorentz generators $M^{\mu\nu}$: \begin{equation} {\Lambda^\mu}_\nu = {\left( \exp \left( \frac{\text{i}}{2} \, \omega_{\alpha\beta} M^{\alpha\beta} \right)\right)^\mu}_\nu , \tag{1} \label{1} \end{equation} where—as far as I understand—the parameters $\omega_{\alpha\beta}$ are antisymmetric in $\alpha, \beta$; while the generators $(M^{\alpha\beta})^{\mu\nu}$ (note the raised $\nu$!) are antisymmetric in both $\alpha, \beta$ and $\mu, \nu$. Obviously, for any specific $\alpha, \beta$, the matrices $\Lambda$ and $M^{\alpha\beta}$ belong to the same vector space (to make my question clearer, I have here considered the ordinary spacetime representation of the Lorentz group).
The antisymmetry in $\alpha, \beta$ gives e.g. $\omega_{10} M^{10} = - \omega_{01} M^{10} = \omega_{01} M^{01}$, whereby \begin{equation} \omega_{\alpha\beta} M^{\alpha\beta} = 2 \sum_{\alpha<\beta} \, \omega_{\alpha\beta} M^{\alpha\beta} , \tag{2} \label{2} \end{equation} so it is easy to see where the factor $1/2$ in eq. \eqref{1} comes from. However, what is not clear to me is the following:
Why the imaginary factor? Obviously it does no harm, since it can be accounted for when defining the $\omega$-s, but why include it in the first place?
Why use two four-indices (!) in the product between parameters and generators? Surely an expression like \begin{equation} {\Lambda^\mu}_\nu = {\left(\exp \omega^i M_i \right)^\mu}_\nu \tag{3} \label{3} \end{equation} would be far less likely to cause confusion, especially when antisymmetry of the generators (by some authors, at least) is derived from considering infinitesimal Lorentz transformations on the form ${\Lambda^\mu}_\nu = \delta^\mu_\nu + {\omega^\mu}_\nu$ (c.f. this question and the aforementioned Srednicki)?
Question number 2 is what puzzles me the most, as I guess no. 1 is linked to unitarity.