Thanks for the proposal and all the great work the core team is doing!
Regarding proposal 1 I advocate for more transparency. You write
"In an effort to set proper expansion expectations and remain aligned with the framework approved in KIP-3, the Policy team proposes..."
Regarding the first part of that sentence: the expectations were set in KIP-3:
We are at 1.6MM supply so the current APY can be expected.
Regarding "remaining aligned with the framework": the current APY is aligned with the framework and a drop to 8000% @ 1.6MM supply could be characterised as "unexpected".
That's why I come back to transparency: I think most members understand if you argue to change policy, but we should argue transparently why we need the changes. I saw some contenders for good reasons in the comments:
- Is it about the falling KLIMA price and thinner margin between BCT & KLIMA
- Do we need more power to incentivise new bonds & project. What are the calculations behind that?
- Do we need to stabilise the the price because of the impermanent loss on the LP
- ...
I would find it great if the policy team would share their thoughts in a bit more detail.