When most votes happen doesn't matter here. The reason is that it takes 5 days for VP to recharge from 0 to 100%. Meaning if it's lower, someone could "double-vote" a post by unstaking and powering up another account to vote on that post again.
I think 30 days would be best because of the account recovery also lasting 30 days in case of a hack or key theft.
Then change the dynamics of VP. Recharge over 3 days but actions cost more.
The 7 day voting window was created because the assumption was that people needed enough time to be able to vote. 3 days is probably enough time.
Somebody did an analysis when votes happen. I don't remember right now.
It used to be 12h and 24h back in the day, I think it was mainly raised to mitigate abuse, so people could have time to reach out to real content creators and ask if it's identity theft, etc. I don't think changing all that just to get a faster powerdown is worth it, the change from 13 weeks to potentially 4 would already be decent enough, imo.
It is an academic discussion and nothing will change.
Why not think a little outside the box ;)
I mainly brought it up cause @dalz said this
just so it's clear that it's not about when most votes occur and it could be something that could halt the chain if the rewardpool gets confused why more stake is voting than there is vp for or something.
Yea that was just to see what sticks :) Still possible if we change the recharge rate ...