The math seems wonky and as someone who could purchase the vote, it doesn't sound appealing. That's me though, I'm tight with my money.
The lowered amount to trend sounds appealing to someone like me who will not purchase the vote. With less rewards being pulled from the pool, more rewards will be applied to our posts. The way it works: if we had enough SP to downvote every post that used bots, all other posts would increase in value as they sit in our blogs. I could be wrong, but that's how the reward pool worked last time I checked, awhile ago. If I'm wrong, then the lowered cost to trend wouldn't boost the value of our posts naturally therefore losing it's appeal.
Ups and downs, pros and cons to everything, right?
I agree with the UI change. I've written about that many times, dating all the way back to December of last year. If that only sweeps problems under the rug though, and hides cases of abuse, it's not good. Some plagiarists have boosted posts to trending in the past. It's comical. Much like walking into a store, introducing yourself to everyone by name, and kindly announcing the fact you're about to steal as much as you can carry out the door.
Anyway. Good talk. Thanks for taking the time.
P.S. If I did piss you off or insult you before, that wasn't my intention, but I do apologize. The downvote wasn't personal. Those never are when I use them.