We would argue that the existing system taxes good content creators, and the proposed system taxes bad content creators because it creates better incentives for quality content curation. But this is all semantics. Calling any of these things taxes is overdramatic hyperbole. Taxes are compulsory fees backed by violence. Steem is an open, decentralized, and voluntary ecosystem that was intended to unearth high quality content. As you agree, it is failing in that regard. The economics behind the proposed changes are sound with respect to better aligning incentives toward curating high quality content. If quality content creators wind up seeing diminished returns, then they should go to a platform that provides them with better returns. But we believe that they will find that these changes increase the odds that they receive rewards, because they are more likely to be found and upvoted while at the same time, thanks to free downvotes, poor content will be more likely to receive downvotes.