I'm still in favor of 50/50, and have been for a really long time... it would make curation a more worthwhile endeavor, which would (I believe) drive up the social aspects, which would strengthen the community and help with retention. Stronger community would also help on the attracting new members front, because a more legitimate case would exist for pitching that "there's something worthwhile, here." I see a lot of "+" marks in different "win" columns.
There's some faulty (or limited) logic in the *"4x rewards" allure. There's an omission. Namely that "You can earn 4x more via leasing to bidbots, BUT there's a good chance that by doing so, you'll be participant to driving the price of Steem towards zero as reasons for end-user participation dry up." But everybody tends to elegantly step around that particular turd in the living room... because it's easier to pitch short term gains than long term investment.
Of course, all changes tend to bring about a flurry of activity among those whose primary objective is to game the system.
Facts. Selling votes equals more Steem but that doesn't necessarily mean more fiat. If we do whats best for the platform, the price of Steem rises with it, we should aim to align the values that make it natural for investors to drive value to the platform.