I agree with most of the points you raised and the goal should be to find the most objective criteria possible for selecting validators without harming decentralization and ideally, even strengthening it if possible.
However, regarding this above, I believe you might be confusing proposed blocks with signed blocks. Proposed blocks are usually chosen among those with the highest stake, whereas block signing is supposed to be performed by all validators to reach the two-thirds voting threshold. Maybe I’m missing something, but from what I understand about Tendermint, the ability to sign blocks is not dependent on the amount of stake held.
Overall, I understand most of your comments, and I believe they are largely relevant and should be taken into account. Still, it should be done with the aim of executing this proposal, once adjusted, in order to make part of the community pool funds useful while preserving and strengthening the decentralization of the network.
Also, if you have other, more neutral criteria to suggest, the community could very well be open to accepting them.