I think it is harmful on the blogging side too. While the cut isn't quite as severe, it is still almost 40%. That is enough to accelerate the pace at which people see the site as not worth the effort and quit. A more gradual transition (on both) makes a lot more sense to me.

Again the main thing from my perspective that is clearly positive and almost without any disadvantages is replacing the hyperinflationary model, and I rather see that done as a clean change that does one thing that everyone can get behind rather than introduce large immediate reward cuts that could be good, could be bad, but are less obviously an overall improvement.

I do think the witness projects (and witnesses who are personally involved full time and relying on witness pay) are a big deal. This platform needs continued supporting services (such as anti-abuse work), investment, and development. Cutting that off abruptly without a transition period to develop new models and funding sources will certainly hurt on the platform side, but it is only speculation whether a more immediate cut in rewards would actually help on the investor side. As an investor, I've been skeptical that the rewards (all of them, but especially the high blogging rewards) are bringing the value to the platform that the are supposed to, but I'd also be concerned about disruption of platform investment and potential loss of users really hurting the platform longer term.