Yes, please.

Of course you have the fighters who get on their bikes for the rest of the night to avoid getting KO'd, but that's no different than the Pistons getting a 30 point lead over the Pacers and then going into defensive mode to protect the lead. It may be boring, but it's the responsible thing to do. And that's putting too much onus on the guy who's actually winning. Either a) the guy losing wasn't fighting hard enough in the beginning or b) he was completely out of his league anyway.

People knee-jerk reject any notion to change and it's understandable. But for the most part, you wouldn't notice the difference. Think about fighters who THOUGHT they had it in the bag and it was a lot closer or they were flat-out losing. Wouldn't they fight different than if it had been closed scoring instead? Don't some guys only have an "on" switch and only fight one way regardless of how the fight looks? And other fighters still are actually concerned about crowd-pleasing. A fighter like Floyd Mayweather would only continue fighting the way he's always fought. He's a great assessor of how well he's doing. Against some fighters he starts to cruise and against others he's all out, whether because the fight is close or he wants to teach a lesson (Gatti). But don't be under the mistaken assumption that open scoring would turn the whole sport on its head. That's like saying let's not end slavery because it could hurt the country's economy. Fair is fair and leaving fighters in the dark as to the score is UNfair.