At least in the comment to which you were replying, I was careful enough to say virtually nothing, rather than actually nothing.

I stated in the channel given the volatility of the underlying asset, an extra 2% is unlikely to have any bearing on actual investor behavior (both trading and staking). This seems to be largely true at least from anecdotal testimonials. That is to say all who have been approached by this question have replied that they've never personally had any decision to power up or down be tilted by this added incentive, nor any decision to buy or sell Steem, which seems fairly consistent with intuition.

I understand your perspective to be as follows: irrespective of it having possibly negligible effects on actual investor behavior, a (roughly) 2% mitigation against an 8% inflation is very non trivial for stakeholders and therefore valuable.

However, if we lock down investor behavior, then however much stakers are favored over non stakers will only affect their individual interests within the system and insofar as it's insufficient to affect market behavior in any way. It's the one variable we can't lock down if we wish to introduce actual value from a use of inflation to the system as a whole.

Whatever we're seeking to achieve with the SPS or EIP (however unsuccessfully in the past), can be broadly summarized as starting a chain reaction that will hopefully lead to more Steem buying pressure. That's the one thing that matters, but it's the one thing that seems to be a huge stretch for vesting interests to lay claim on. It isn't a matter of failed execution, it's just conceptually a very redundant use of inflation.

In terms of additional incentives to vest, the 50% curation will also act as a counter weight against too much liquid Steem vs SP. While this is only half the amount of the inflation, considering that most of Inc's stake is idle, then in practice the difference between the two options is fairly similar for most stakeholders. Of course if the EIP goes well then author/curation also serves to further the content discovery and rewards goals of the platform.

I really implore you to reconsider this in light of my arguments once more please.

Irrespective of where the inflation ultimately comes from, I'm assuming you and @blocktrades feel that economic rule set of the SPS is sound enough to kick it off with 10% inflation? I haven't looked at it, it's not really my place as I'm intruding enough into your HF already, and I'll trust your combined judgement on this. Not holding you to an unfairly high standard of course, econ and behavior being difficult to predict, but you've no doubt played it out countless times in your mind and things look good at expected equilibrium that you wouldn't want to start with a lower value?