The biggest issue you seem to ignore is that you find the system unfair as it currently is (though don’t own DVC anymore, did you even under the current system?). However the prior system was inherently unfair.
So let’s draw a hypothetical in that there are 10 rooms exactly available for 12/10-12/15 and 11 hypothetical owners interested in this rooms. 10 of the owners want the room 12/10-12/14 and the last wants 12/10-12/15.
Under the current system walking wouldn’t really be needed for that ratio of demand vs supply. Sure one could walk but it marginally improves your odds, though remember all owners can walk if they chose so fair on that front but let’s pretend walking is magically made to go away. This on 1/10 all 11 owners are eligible to book their stay and have equal and fair chance at booking.
Under the old system 10 of the owners can book their stays 1/14 thus all the rooms are now gone 12/10-12/14 so the last owner can’t book ever their intended stay. Again assuming day by day isn’t needed because you assume the need for day by day goes hand and hand with the need for walking. So this system is inherently detrimental to longer DVC stays.
Edit: day by day was never the intended way to book a room and was still “cheating” because it was to be 11 months from your check out day. You really are just choosing which “cheating” you are comfortable with to justify switching back. I think
@zavandor showed well why the current walking is a preferred method of “cheating” over the day by day method.