I did skim the post, so I might have missed some subtleties :) The fact is that if self-voting increases then the quality of top posts will decrease. It's supposed to be about rewarding quality content, not just according to who has the most SP. I appreciate that people want a return on their investment.
I do see rampant self-voting happening. Some are blatant about doing it purely for greed and there's not much we can do to stop them except to have whales flagging them and to encourage voting on the good stuff. It is in the interest of big investors for Steemit to succeed as the potential gains are much higher than they are now. I know some whales are countering the abuse, but it may not be enough. A lot of the minnows may be tempted to join a 'dash for cash', but they are unlikely to get much whale support, so it may be futile. I want to see everyone have a chance to do well and not just a selected few. This is why I spread my votes around and delegate to others.
I think the "whales" problem with the control of supply in few people hands is one basic principles of a new born technology. Whales are not a selected few they are not here by harzard.
thousands
If a new technology is successful early adopters get rewarded from the research they done before anyone else and the fact they trust enought their vision to take risk and invest into something than nobody else believed in.
More the project advance and the adoption / price increase more and more early adopters (whales) take gradually profits and distribute the supply to the point where the supply is no longer in the hands of fews persons.
It is a normal market reaction.
I let you have a look at the Bitcoin supply distribution, even now few people hold a large amount of BTC supply:
Some people invested in Steem early on and stand to profit from that. I know some people bought when it was up around $4 in the early days. That's fair enough. I didn't have money available to invest, but I've been able to earn a nice amount.