Yes, there will be a bigger slice of the pie, only not for good content it will be for the big players.

I’m not sure what you’re expecting from Steem protocols other than maybe forking out the “big players.” Whatever the protocols are, if they’re based on DPoS and rewarding stakeholders, the “big players” will likely benefit from them more. That’s kind of the point of staking.

I am saying this because you make it sound like 50/50 is a win win for everyone...

First of all, not everyone will be a “winner” no matter what the protocols are. Users are competing for rewards. Some will “win.” Most will “lose.” The point of the protocols is to make users feel as though they can be a “winner” in order to entice them to contribute to the system.

Secondly, the best way for “all” of us to “win” (outside of the direct competition for rewards, where we can’t all win) would be to attract investment and reverse the STEEM price trend. When prices rise and users are contributing and earning STEEM as rewards, those tokens will be more valuable and everyone collecting them can potentially receive more profits if they cash out.

The EIP is designed to make investment more attractive by better rewarding risk via acquiring and powering up STEEM.

We aren’t getting that investment today. Authors who are simply here to “get paid” (cash out) are obviously not contributing to the investment side of the equation. So should we continue giving authors 75% of content rewards, which are 75% of total STEEM inflation?

Do the math. That kind of free giveaway isn’t sustainable, as we have seen for three years now. Combine that with STINC’s multi-year ninja-mined STEEM dumping plan, and it leaves us in a really terrible position. The economics need to be fixed.

As I said in the OP, I don’t think the EIP is enough. But it’s a good start.

What do you think should be done? Do you favor the SPS? From where do you think we can attract new investment?