Thank you.
I read the proposal. It is an interesting idea, but unfortunately it would not solve the current situation. The problem is with ratios of STEEM. The Steemit, Inc. accounts have more STEEM than all of the other actively voting stakeholders combined. If you cut those accounts voting power by 30x, you also cut the voting power of the other voters by 30x. Steemit could just divide their existing stake into 20 separate accounts and use each one to vote in one witness.
@smooth just also pointed out that problem of inactive and lost stake, which I had failed to reckon. However, the problem of inequity and it's centralizing influence remains, and so does the problem of tortuous harm presently ongoing.
The proposal may not solve the threat of influence the founder's stake represents, but it does solve inequity and tort, insofar as they can be solved. We are in the situation we are in, vis a vis the founder's stake, and sometimes it's best to pucker up and kiss the pig when the music plays.
Thanks!