No reason not to do it again.
The world is a little different now than it was then, and that change didn't affect nearly as many people then as it would now (not only was that change to just one of the two balls, there were far fewer golfers then than now, with far different coverage, etc.). And there are many reasons not to do it again — just saying "no reason" doesn't make it true.
An 7% reduction in ball distance would be significant. A 7,500 yard golf course today could be shorted to ~6,950 yards with the high spin ball tomorrow.
If you think they'd somehow never reduce the spin from 2x… I've got a bridge to sell you somewhere. They'd knock it back down quite quickly. So who would that hurt more off the tee? Amateur golfers. Pros would probably struggle to figure out how to hit wedges that didn't suck off the green like Norman did, but they'd gain almost all of that 7% back faster than you seem to think.
I was allowed to watch play, ask questions of the players (they knew I was there) and hit balls on the range. It was interesting. I found the ball hit, chipped and putted the exact same.
Your margins (and ability to see differences) are quite different than a PGA Tour player's. For them, 200 RPM spin on a short game shot is significant, and matters.
https://www.golfdigest.com/story/inside-tiger-woods-ball-testing-processThat's why so many guys will still play, for example, "the 2017 Pro V1" or whatever. Adjusting to a new ball takes time. It'd result in a shift in who had the skills to play at the elite level: it would help some players (maybe those who struggled to generate enough spin) and hurt some others (some higher spin players perhaps).
I've said a few things here on this. I don't think a rollback is needed because it over-weights a tiny percentage of the golf population. I've said that if you want to justify a rollback, the argument that carries the most weight with me is land use, water use, resources. I've said that if they do roll the ball back, I'd want them to REALLY understand what they're doing and what effect(s) it would have, because I wouldn't want a massive disruption to the game of golf to result in… nothing really changing at the pro level (and the amateurs being harmed worse), because elite golfers and their manufacturers "figured it out" pretty quickly. I've also said I'm against bifurcation because it harms everyone just below whatever level they draw the line.