As I stated in the post the overall affect for authors - 

> **Author Rewards**
With the implementation of the SPS and 50:50 component of the EIP, author rewards percentage of the pool will be decreased somewhere around 42.2%.

> The goal or idea is though that with the combined components of the EIP taking effect, there will be less spam taking rewards and more individuals curating (as it's now profitable to do so). Which could mean even though the author rewards percentage is lower, the reward pool will be bigger (less abuse taking it) and therefore the actual rewards an author receives will actually increase.

> I believe these changes will take time to balance out, as with any changes, so I personally think we should prepare for an immediate decrease in the post payout we see. But to keep calm and let the system begin to take it's new form. It is my hope that over the few weeks after the hardfork, authors contributing positively to the ecosystem will begin to see their rewards increase again. This is the goal.

Yes overall percentage of the pool for authors will be reduced by 42.2% but the rewards pool will be bigger and therefore their cut will be worth more. That is the desired effect anyways.

A 10% decrease across the board would look like this - 

65% Author/curator | 5% interest | 0% witnesses | 30% SPS

Who will run the nodes? 🤷🏻‍♀️

Also, the only “profit” seen by a successful SPS would be an increase in the overall value of the STEEM currency and therefore benefit anyone holding STEEM. Also, it might actually encourage more to invest in STEEM.. which again adds benefit to everyone. 

I agree that multi funding allocation would be ideal, but I don’t think that a 10% cut from content creators (including myself) is them caring every thing on their shoulders, especially as they will great benefit from the SPS themselves. 

I think is more an us vs them thing based on lack of involved on platform from many witnesses and therefore they are not seen as “on the same side”.. but they are here and are actively contributing as well as many actually investing in STEEM, which means that it benefits them to increase the over all value, just like it does to everyone else.

Do I think they are great leaders, no 🙂 but I do whole heartedly believe they want what’s best for STEEM. While I don’t necessarily agree with all aspects of this change or the bundle, I do believe this is an attempt to improve it for all of us.

Everyone who invests or earns STEEM should care about the price. Many have invested money out of their pocket and others have earned for contributing here. 

Sure those that hold more have more to gain, and they should (otherwise why would anyone buy STEEM) but they also have more to loose. 

But we all should very much care about the price of STEEM.

> and now there will be a 25% free downvoting feature which means people will downvote for any stupid reason they can think of downvoting for

Downvotes always just shift rewards from one place to others so they have no effect on the total rewards. If you manage to get fewer than your share of downvotes, even if you still get some, your share of the pool will go up. The idea is that obvious reward milkers especially the larger ones, should be clear downvote magnets, so for most users getting fewer downvotes than they are should not be difficult (unless you are a reward milker).

How effectively downvotes will be used (or even if they will be used) remains to be seen.

There is no punishment, as content creators don’t own the pool.. is shared by all.. and they benefit as much as anyone else. But with that being said, I am very much in favor of it coming from multiple places. 

As far as millions spent by I assume you meant Steemit Inc.. that’s sort of the goal of the SPS, for the community to take it into their own hands.

It has been determined that you are trash, therefore, you have received a negative vote.<br><br>PLEASE NOTE: If you engage with the trash above you also risk receiving a negative vote on your comment.

A tax implies you are paying something on money that is yours, the inflation pool is not yours or any of ours. So no, it’s not a tax as you don’t own it. It’s a shared pool made from inflation that is currently allocated to things that are supposed to return value. Reallocating it to something else that adds value is not a tax.  It actually comes from those holding stake and if they didn’t hold stake it wouldn’t be there. So if you are set and determined to think someone is “paying” for it, it’s the large stake holders. 

A couple more flags will not greatly change unjust flagging, it’s not a free for all after all.. and censorship implies you are restricted.. if you were censored I wouldn’t be able to read your comment. It’s not censorship, it’s an annoyance and unjust flags need to stop.. but I believe downvotes down correctly can do wonders, if they are used.