Although I don't think there is any conspiracy behind the rule changes, but I gotta say for skaters to now win based on GOE alone is kinda crazy. It seems that skaters now have to have to fit a much higher standard than what was asked ages ago, and I do agree that this takes out a lot of the originality of figure skating. I feel different skaters jump in different ways but it seems that speed and height are the main factors that go into GOE. I just feel that a lot of unique and great skaters (e.g Lu Chen) in the past may not have survived under the CoP system because their techniques weren't as polished.
Originality is not a victim of GOE. It's a victim of CoP. As a concept, GOE is great, but the system is young and it may need some tweaking. Is it fair for Caroline Zhang's 3F to get the same points as Yu-na's? I don't think so. Think of all the time and effort Yu-na put into perfecting her jumping technique. It should be rewarded. I don't, however, think speed and height are the only main factors. Those are the most prominent, as they're evident in even the layman's eyes. Very few casual observers can distinguish between a fully-rotated jump and an URed jump. How could we expect them to know the more subtle distinguishing aspects of a high GOE-garnering jump, such as position changing (the tano), good/bad extension, transitions, etc. Look at Joannie. She may lack a 3-3 and a 3A, but her TES is very high. Her jumps are great, but her transitions are amazing.
I have another question too. What else constitutes a good jump? I really don't see how the GOE points could be changed, as I define a fine jump to be one with great height, ice coverage, speed, extension and transitions. Correct technique, of course, would follow the base value, as inadequacy is penalized. GOE, however, is rewarded for exceptional quality. Perhaps we should include a GOE bulletpoint for risk. What other suggestions do you propose?