Dudemyguy
I understand the reasoning for a longer more drawn out runway and I am in complete agreement. But I feel we should have proposals touch on multiple issues while changing one of our levers.
I think lowering the APY does not save stakers, not even in the long run. We'll extend our runway a little bit but also at the cost of people unstaking and selling their Ohm. People should be drawn to Ohm staking because it can be an easy way to farm. Staking Ohm is a bet that the protocol can capture more value over time than your original DAI. Making bonding more incentivized helps but doing it too much makes stakers vulnerable. I also think it's partly an UX issue with people not bonding enough.
Recently I think Malt was an interesting experiment which blew itself up. It attracted people for Ohm-like monster APY. Then the peg was reached and APY dropped to a paltry 200% APY. Which caused a bank run on the protocol and completely destroyed the peg. We might have a floor but that floor can be eroded over time as well.
Either way I'm digressing, most of this is not relevant to the proposal. I still support it, we have to experiment and see what works and what doesn't. Right now runway is decreasing which is a major issue. So short term lowering the APY is great as we look for more ways to capture value and increase the treasury. I think this is definitely a good step forward.