I too felt that the survey was not well constructed, not well focused and was severely weighted by distributing it only by Twitter. If the opinions of the public were being sought, that approach seemed generationally biased, anti-luddite, and cavalier (apologies to Rosemont.) Not all fans are tech savvy, interested in Twitter, or free to peruse such.
I disagree on each of Bruckner's comments except increasing the number of participants (by which I mean the number of corps not the number of members on the field for each corps. DCI shows have been more active on the field by legacy than the hippopotamus size units of certain h.s. band circuits and many college bands.) To do what DCI has always done has involved most of the corps MMs almost all the time, not the whole-scale "time-outs"/sit-outs the larger bands use where sections and subsections are, at best, hidden behind the scrim to wait until its their turns resulting in MMs only doing 1/2 or !/3 of the whole show at times. Southern and Texas bands are notorious for that when I evaluated shows down there; I always presumed it was due to a heat and humidity factor or the Texas restrictions on how many hours a band student may practice in a given week. .
Even 150 MMs is too large sometimes for the DCI level of drill as well as the echo in most of the indoor stadia for regionals and championships.