I have also just posted on this topic today. I have been considering weighting votes either by reputation - or not at all. Either way, I am presently convinced that the current weighting method harms Steemit, it's users, and no one more than holders of substantial SP.
Consider that investors in Steem strongly support the Steemit platform. Indeed, it is their investments and capital that make it possible, so clearly they deeply care about the experiment that Steemit is.
They have to manage their wealth carefully, because, not only do they highly value it, but because Steemit depends on it. The weighting of votes creates Vote Power (VP), based on how much SP they have.
This also creates the situation where their self votes deliver $1000's into their accounts every week. If they don't self vote, they are poorly managing their wealth, and the wealthy tend not to be wealthy long if they poorly manage their wealth.
This chart is from just before HF19:
This also means that if they care about other content, they can't curate it, because it would cost them $1000's. They are trapped, voiceless, by the weight of SP that silences their votes and curative powers - and the rest of us are deprived of voices competent to manage great wealth. That many of them do still curate and post only exemplifies how dedicated they are to the Steemit platform, Steemers, and altruism, rather than greed - even though it costs them significant income.
Here's where you can read my post on the matter, and why making votes equal in weight, or weighted only by reputation, can fix many problems that have slowed Steemit's growth, frustrated many Steemers, and made the goals of Steemit's developers practically unattainable.
Thanks for your own thoughtful consideration of the matter!