You claim the price of Steem is somehow related to these rewards distribution without evidence.
I don’t think I said this either.. The price of STEEM is 100% based on the supply and demand for STEEM. All I can do is speculate on what forces drive demand.
In your post: https://steempeak.com/hf21/@timcliff/hardfork-21-steem-proposal-system-sps-economic-improvement-proposal-eip#@timcliff/pt9gg6
The following claim are made by YOU: "The STEEM price has fallen significantly from the all-time-high, and there is not much optimism for it going much higher than it is today. In fact, a lot of people are worried that it will just continue to go lower."
This is within the context of the rewards structure changes proposed in the EIC. If I'm getting this wrong it's because you've explained it poorly, but in context, I interpret this to mean that because of the current rewards structure, people aren't vesting and therefor the price is falling. Keep in mind here that when you make changes to this economic system based on speculation, you're taking us all on the ride with you.
You claim that what really matters are large stakeholders.
Again, where did I say this?
the rest I earn by posting and you are trying to make it harder for people like me to earn my way.
I have told you already - I am not. My goal is actually to try and increase the amount of money that authors (who are contributing and adding value) make.
You're right. What I should have said is that you will in practice make it harder for people like me to earn my way and benefit large stake holders. As a side note, you're decreasing transactional clarity for the public. If you want to see my thinking on this check out @thecryptodrive's thread on this matter.
The tour de force is:
I am not presenting evidence because I don’t have any.
Tim. If you were me and I promised you all of these changes were going to make things better, but then couldn't cite any real world examples backing up my claims from any other area of real world economic studies, would you trust me? If you couldn't see any detailed polling from the community if the proposed changes were what they wanted, would you trust me if I told you that it was simply based on my observations without showing showing you what data or experimentation led to your conclusions? If you were me, and you were told that your pay was getting cut, but that hypothetically you'd get more in some distant future, would you honestly believe me? We don't know each other. I have no way of trusting each other and I don't think that the number of your witness position necessarily makes adept at understanding how all these changes are going to affect us.
You just can’t see it because your paycheck depends on not seeing it.
I don’t know what you are implying
You know exactly what I'm implying, but just in case you don't, let me be explicit. You are a large stakeholder and you stand to gain a large financial reward from this change. Am I incorrect in this assumption? If so, I'd like to see the math proving me wrong. If I am wrong, I apologize.
FINALLY
You claim self-voting is a problem when only 6.4% of total votes are self-voted, a tiny problem by my estimation.
Where have I ever said this?
You're right. I must have confused you with someone else and so I apologize for that.
In the end, you and the other Top 20 have done a real crap job at convincing the rest of us that these changes are the right course of action, and you're right, you are free to vote however you like. The crux of the matter is that - at this stage at least - I don't think you or the others are worthy of your positions or have earned the right to make these changes.