I like to think of SMTs as linked to dApps but also to Communities, with potentially many Communities having their own SMT reward token. Allowing different reward curves for each SMT would be very useful, allowing each dApp / Community flexibility in what they are trying to incentivise / achieve.
The problem for Steem is that it is trying to be many things at once. We want to find and reward the best content (i.e. content creation, a bit like youtube?) but we also want to incentivise mass adoption with many users and lots of engagement (i.e. social network, a bit like facebook?). The CLRC works towards the former (by aiming to remove some abuse, thus making it more likely rewards head to good content) but at the expense of the latter.
A Community / dApp that was only interested in rewarding the best content, or which wanted some form of one-person-one-vote functionality in addition to a dPoS vote functionality (i.e. a reason to remove sybil issues) would probably find the CLRC very useful.
Would this be a bad thing at this stage of the game considering while any want mass adoption now, are we actually ready for it?
Definitely.
I think this would be very useful for continued development of many kinds.
I think that if the idea of the EIP is focus on good content but to sacrifice mass adoption efforts / comments and engagement / the idea of Steem as a social network then that should be made very clear in the proposal. That would be a pretty big pivot.
In my view it's a bad move.
I don't think that is the idea, by the way, I think that solutions have been sought to a particular set of problems but without fully considering the other problems that could arise.