To summarise my observations:
I wrote a long response to @smooth @therealwolf and more. They just ignored. Which shows they are clueless about what they are doing. They are not speaking to content creators at all. Living in their own filter bubble. @lordbutterfly has the true authority on this question and nobody has addressed his real points here (any real argument should be addressed there since he has pointed stuff out in the most clear way):
@fyrstikken and @yabapmatt has also addressed extremely valid points which makes 50/50 pro-Stake holders arguments weak. Messing with the core economy because of a few Stake holders wanna make more with their 1 click curation. Promotion services allows people to make a small ROI and be able to run stuff themselves. With some win-win on all sides.
@tcpolymath also had a longer discussion with @smooth.
How many Steem witnesses has been speaking to true content creators? Nobody. Any real content creator is against this 50/50 since it wouldn't empower content creators. As @lordbutterfly has been writing it would encourage fast low effort content. Play the game of 50/50 fine but then all content creators will move to fast low effort stuff and while we are at it people will automate curation even more than what currently goes on.
Content creators has the highest authority on this question since it's them that daily produce the real value that makes people come back. They are the future of a content network. Or is this a curation network? It's a content network.
I'm beginning to think it's a cartoon network.
Valid points, but we can always go back if the 50/50 fails. STEEM is still an experiment :)
Thx for the vote of confidence but i just tried to present the opposing opinion the best way i could. Im most definetly not an authority. Someone else could probably do it just as well or even better.
Its very hard to send a message across to witnesses when it matters more "who said what", then "what was said". But thats just DPOS...
When 500 of our voices arent worth as much as the voice of one Kevin, then it becomes imperative to come together and express our disagreement to the best of our ability.
Well the way I see it is that it's the current authority on the topic as long as they have failed to address the points being said. It shows weakness in the other side and that they do not wanna argue since they know they would lose in a rational discussion. I wrote a long in depth comment probably 300-400 words that clearly went over why this would fail. No response. If Steem witnesses do not wanna discuss certain things in depth then it shows serious weaknesses that can make all fall apart in the future.