Firstly I am concerned about the stagnant state of Steem, doing nothing has a greater cost imo. A change to the economy could be the fresh catalyst that brings about reform and better Steem prices for stakeholders.

1. I don't totally hate the idea, I think it would increase demand for SP and possibly increase the value of Steem, however as per @drakos it could also have the effect of discouraging content and we are left for a wasteland of low-value posts, its a psychological thing in the end, why must I take 30-60 mins or longer creating a post when I can just vote stuff and get the same % rewards, also there is the risk of bandwagon voting where certain authors will get all the votes because people know they are going to get many pile-on votes.

BuildTeam services such as DLease and Steemvoter will benefit from this, but I am cautious about making this change and would rather see more focus on the SPS (DAO); a change to the rewards as well as a further hit from inflation source funding to the DAO would be too much and would create too much fricition, confusion, unrest and rage quitting in the community rather than focussing on coming together to make worker proposals successful.

In saying that if majority of witnesses go with this, I will follow suit as it does have potential upsides and only by trying do we know, we could alway revert back if it sucks.

1. Agree

2. I think this is fine, I also agree with @anyx that it should be a witness parameter, 25% is a very standard figure and may not be the right % and may need some tweaking over time to get it right.