I disagree with these:
* Standardized payouts on a 7 day timer
* Comment reward pool

Neutral
* keep n^2 for longer time

Others are OK.

//Edit: The point is to bring author reward beneficiaries and SP delegation this time. If it's too hard to decide a curve, we can keep it unchanged for a while.

>Update on Simplicity: Cutting Complexity with Steem 0.17.0

Adding another rewards pool isn't "cutting complexity" - especially when the pool still pays people for posts, even if the posts are child posts instead of parent posts. 

I would *love* more simplicity for the platform mechanics/functionality as a user, as I think most people do. Still waiting for that...

>And remember to vote for the Witnesses who upgrade to the changes YOU want to see! Steem’s evolution depends on your votes!

- On a recent @votu podcast episode which featured the witnesses and their views on the hardfork, we wondered...  How exactly are we supposed to support the witnesses who will be voting the way we would like them to, without harassing them to find out how they will be voting (for or against the changes), and furthermore, how are these witnesses who want to represent the community, supposed to know what their supporters want them to do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-myMvi3pi8&t

- If you really want to get to know the witnesses let us introduce you to @fyrstdragon, @dogefunk, and others.  @dan there's a special request in here for you, (you missed your chance @ned)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Rq84SBpHI

Also I approve of all changes though I would prefer to see comment curation rewards go to the commenters, and think this would be simpler despite it being different from posts.  It's already quite clear they work differently since the same curation incentives naturally aren't there.

### Lets talk about it over donuts!
![sig2.PNG](https://steemitimages.com/DQmdspEBpGw8VWYjWza5sVu13PH2TLn3yQBxXNRQPf9XL3Y/sig2.PNG)

> there are game theoretic challenges that haven’t been fully modeled.

I live and breathe game theoretic challenges. What concerns you? How can I help?

Je suis impatient de voir la nouvelle interface de Steemit cette année. :)

>We considered proposing a move from the n^2 curve [...]
>A modification could be good, but there are game theoretic challenges that haven’t been fully modeled.

Wow, it must be very complicated. How about this challenge: people having *double* your steem power now have  *four times* your voting power, and this will be still true after fork. Correct?

I would like linear curve or, even better, logaritmic. Not quadratic for sure.

Will update. My witness node has not been able to get a block in a month. Maybe this update will get me one.

> Changes to Reward Curves: Not Yet

I am disappointed by this bad news. Here's why.

> We considered proposing a move from the n^2 curve (to either modified superlinear n or a linear n), which would mean more influence on rewards for smaller holders of Steem Power than is the case today.

The way you recognize the new curve is inadequate. It's not about increasing small holder's power, but about give fair influence proportional to all holder's stake. Concentration on concentration is a big social problem in Steem IMO.

> A modification could be good, but there are game theoretic challenges that haven’t been fully modeled.

Please stop using game scheme, unless you want to create gambling site. Creativity and positiveness come from encouraging and fair social base, not from win-or-lose arena.

> Rest assured, we’ve completed the implementation. We just need to see how it functions. If it performs better than the current model, we may include it in the 0.18.0 release.

You cannot know how it exactly works until you implement it. Different rule makes different behaviors and outcomes.

> These changes are about rewarding the best content, so we’re handling any voting curve changes with care.

`n^2` has no relationship of rewarding best contents. It's all about concentration of power on few whales. And it's obvious that the current system are generating many serious problems now.

What Ned told me is that `n` will encourage self-vote abuse and hence decreases amount of reward to other authors. But this is not a fatal problem, and can be addressed with community efforts IMO. We are already not rewarding "best contents" and many people are looking forward to a flattened curve. I hope that we have the new linear curve ASAP.