The CQ World Wide 160 Meter DX Caontest.
I would say it should be what the amateur community wants it to be.  Of course hams will compete in any contest just to work some new countries, bust pileups, run away from stress, or whatever.  The Sponsoring Body can obviously configure the contest as the sponsoring body would like.  After all, it takes a massive amount of time, energy, money to sponsor one.  Unfortunately, not enough credit is given to those who make it possible. 
As far as the rules change in the early days from Serial Numbers to RST:  All the things mentioned-faster exchanges, etc. will increase participation....thrill....well, that is debatable because to Many, maybe most, the thrill is "Competing".  A contest is competing, Maybe the thrill of competing comprises the motivation of most, I dont think so and hope not.  Was this move "Watering down" the requirements to get more participation in the earlier days?  K5NA gave that answer.  If so....You dont need any more Quantity, You got it now!!  You cant get a signal in there edgewise.  It sounds like now is the time to go for Quality!  Times Change!
If the entire thrust of the contest is simply the QSO, then at least call it what it is: a QSO Party.  The problem is that the perceived notion is one where stations in categories and zones are given awards and noteriety for their skills.  Maybe I had it wrong all along.  I thought it required skills to build stations, copy callsigns in pileups/QRN/QRM/Line Noise/and it appeared to me that guys all over the planet were primarily trying to prove their metal.  Thats just what I got from all those visits to Dayton, online and offline chatter and club meetings.
I totally understand your(Contest Committee's) point.  Signal reports qualify a QSO for a QSL/Contact.  And, a QSO without a signal report would be technically invalid for a QSL......I hadn't considered that.  I'm saying that the Emperor has no clothes.  A signal report without meaning is a pure JOKE.  When 999,999,999 contest QSOs out of 1,000,000 are 599 from automated keyers to maximize efficiency....what does that mean?  Get serious now.  And don't make fun of those County Hunters anymore either.  It is a hypocrisy to require a report on a piece of paper to "Confirm" contact and allow participants to manufacture reports for their self gain to make a higher score in a contest.  This invalidates the reason for requiring a report to "Confirm" a QSO.  
Lets get 100 hams in a room and agree to define reports of 339 to 599 on a tape and then send in another 100 hams to translate the signals into RST reports when they hear the samples.  That may just qualify for the $10,000 prize on America's Funniest Videos.
If the Ham Radio community wants to call this a contest, make it a valid contest with integrity and institute measures to help insure that the rules are such that it's difficult to cheat.   Computers can facilitate the rule breakers and benders-check partials, zone locations, etc......modifying the exchange, AND using computers to detect cheating can elevate the value of competiting to win, and expose the cheaters.  Amateurs who have been abiding by the rules would not have a problem with this.  Those who have been a little shady would find a reason to reject the notion, wouldn't they?  
If it is skill oriented, call it a Contest.  If it is a QSO Party call it that.
I remember the beginning CQWW days when the 160 contest had only a modicum of participants, makeshift antennas, no noise supression, and a handful of stations to work.  California was a heck of a treat to work from Georgia.  It was a close knit group of amateurs with seemingly high integrity and altruism.  The contest rules have evolved to what it is today to adapt to the sheer numbers out there...nothing wrong with that.  But sounds like the cheating monster is alive and well.  Does anyone want to evolve and deal with that perception?  Does anybody really care? Is the UA6 the only one? I also remember W1BB who got most of this started.  Don't think Mr. Perry was interested in easy ways to "make" a contact.  
I stand by my comments that a change needs to be made.  A real and valid and honest signal report exchanged should be and was created to inform the sender and receiver of how their equipment is working.  Interesting, that in my 50 years of hamming, Dxing, Qsling, contesting,awards, etc.  that I have never had a QSL or QSO crosschecked with RS/T reports.  Why are we sending and faking them?  Does the  contest committee even look at them and compare them?  What is the reason to invalidate a contact?-Callsign error, time error, RST error....don't wast time with that one...all are 599......What is the significance if it is meaningless?  I'm getting older but I aint senile and MENSA aint kicked me out yet.
I believe that there a lot of Manley Men out there contesting their hearts out...investing money time whatever...risking lives on towers, fooling with 6,000VDC 100,000VRF planning- thinking- inventing-traveling to foreign countries- to conquer the 160 Frontier.  Who would have ever dreamed it would be possible to work 300+ countries there?  These guys are serious.  The rules for The Premier 160M contest in the world, The CQWW should be commensurate with that.  Nothing less.  I doubt you will lose more than 10% participation by requiring some type of exchange other than, or in addition to, RS/T.  Let those guys play somewhere else if its too hard to do.  If the cheaters dont want to cheat and have to work harder, let them stay at home too.  Most things worth having are worth working for.  
Get honest about those signal reports.  FiNi8 = Five Nine Zero Eight?
What standards to you want?   What does it mean?  How do you keep the value and standards high or higher?  Does the Lowband community want a QSO Party or a DX Contest?  Whatever that is, speak out, let it happen or don't complain later.
73,  
Val