A size reduction is not justified by your posts.
I disagree.
Suppose you are implementing the following two-party protocol for an antivirus web server:
1. Client. Uploads a file.
2. Server. Checks the file for viruses and sends a respond to the user with the result
Would you let the user send files as long as 4 Gb ?
Why? What implications would that have to your antivirus infrastructure?
What would be the additional cost and complexity of designing an antivirus checking module that can handle such files, assuming such files won't fit in RAM.
What if some programmer forgets that such a file can be uploaded?
What if many users sends such big files at the same time?
There are too many "whats if" for such an unused "feature".
You see, Bitcoin has the same problem. Transactions can required more than 4 Gb to be processed by any existing client. You can either handle it by reducing very little the transaction size, or you can wait to see when a smart hacker notices how to exploit the problem.
And a simply pool of a not well informed audience is not a good mechanism to make decisions.
To "inform the audience", first you have to make them think for themselves about something. I have no authority to make ANY decision. I'm nobody, not a core dev, not a mining pool owner, not a merchant. I don't even own BTC, apart from the ones in my testnet.
I'm here because I like Bitcoin.