What people are asking is what would be graded in an artistic program, versus what would be graded in a technical program? Particularly in the latter case, because I don't think most people would be very interested in watching something that had no performative aspect, so if you are still expected to do artistic stuff in the technical program, does it just not count for your score?
We don't know yet.
One possibility:
A technical program pretty much exactly like the current well-balanced free skate, with more jump elements than anything else, leveled spins and steps, five program components of which two are more technical and three are more artistic but only PCS as a whole only counts for approximately half the score -- or less under the current scale of values and PCS factors for skaters who are including lots of quads because the factors were set at a time when one easier quad in a SP and three easy quads in a freeskate was cutting edge -- or even less than that if the PCS factors were to be reduced or some or all of the program components removed from the scoring of this program.
An "artistic" program where the total number of jump elements allowed is equal to or lower than the total number of non-jump technical elements allowed, where spins and steps are not leveled but treated more like the current choreo sequence and ice dance choreo spins, and where the PCS factors are weighted significantly higher than in the technical program.
So in the tech program the technical elements would constitute by far the largest part of the score but PCS could still play a part, and in the artistic program the PCS could constitute by far the largest part of the score but the quality of the technical elements could still play a part and possibly the difficulty of the jumps would as well.
It's really far too early to say much of anything about this idea since we don't have the details, but I've yet to see a proposal for this that was all that coherent.
Yes, there has been no formal proposal advanced, so we have nothing to debate yet whether it is good or bad. We can speculate on what might work better or not so well. But we could be heading down a completely different path than the ISU in our speculations.
So the short program was introduced to decrease the importance of the technical (figures) and increase the importance of artistry.
More like, the short program was introduced to decrease the importance of the less athletic technical skill of tracing circles on the ice and increase the importance of freeskating -- which constituted skating fast and freely and executing jumps and other athletic technical skills as well as allowing for individuality and artistry.
I do not like the voluntarism of what is happening. That is, they are changing the sport in a grandiose manner, on a fundamental level. And what, they do not want to know the opinion of hundreds of thousands (and perhaps even millions) of fans around?
These guys do not grow bread, do not mine coal and do not build power plants (that which has objective value). All their value is in our eyes and hearts. Without us, it’s just a meaningless ride on pieces of iron on ice. Therefore, we must be asked whether we want a fundamental change in sports.
How about asking the skaters themselves first -- the current senior competitors, recently and not-so-recently retired competitors, and current coaches? Ultimately this historically and still primarily amateur sport exists for the participants more than for the fans.
Yes, attracting audiences is a consideration, and yes the current competitive skaters and coaches will adapt their training to whatever it takes to win under whatever new rules are put in place.
When looking at what will "grow the sport" should the ISU think more in terms of what will attract more fans worldwide or in specific national markets, or what will attract more participants?
And of course what attracts fans depends a lot on which country's audience we're talking about and also which demographics within those audiences. Including but not limited to a distinction between sports fans who are most impressed by acrobatics in the air and grudgingly tolerate the less obvious athletic and the obviously artistic aspects of the performance, arts fans who are most impressed by overall performance quality and grudgingly tolerate the risky skills that reduce the likelihood of "clean" programs, and skating-specific fans who love the blend of technique and athleticism and artistry and the tensions between them -- even if the exact balance favored by the current rules is not to their individual preference.
It's lost more fans that it's gained with it's emphasis on the technical.
In which country? In which age group?
Jason is fairly rewarded for what he does.
I'm saying that a skater from a small fed or a fed with less power would not get the points he deserves. So he can't afford to have only triples. That's why Jin learned quads in priority. That's why Rizzo pushed to get a quad. That's why Yee from a smal small small fed is training to get a consistent quad.
And yet skaters from smaller federations without quads, such as Deniss Vassiljevs and Misha Ge at
2018 Worlds, could earn PCS comparable to some quadsters from larger federations with comparable skating skills when they skated clean.
), I despise the quad PCS boost, it’s not good judging. 
