@GolanTrevize has some very interesting points but I think that voting no would really limit our development and we could become an "on-chain corporate" that needs 2 weeks for every decision and I don't think that's something we want.
Also, as others mentioned, we could see new competitors that are much more flexible and it can hurt us more (+ we can lose our first mover advantage).
I'll be voting yes.
Rip the band-aid off, high APY means nothing and reducing it will help our metrics A LOT (I still think that 1000% is too high 
).
GoingJohnGalt You're right, it's time to move on but Toucan needs to fulfill their promises first. What was done was done and I have no hard feelings towards Toucan but the arbitrage situation needs to be fully resolved, the sooner the better.
IBuyShitCoins I have the same opinion - I'll vote yes BUT ONLY if we have tangible results (e.g. specific dates and plan) regarding arbitrage reimbursement.
Also, in the proposal, Toucan is talking about the need for a single standard and unification but they (I suppose without consulting with Klima DAO) chose to introduce NCT-USDC pool that is in direct contradiction with Klima DAO's goal - to be the central carbon trading pair of the on-chain market that would make adding new pairs MUCH EASIER and thus helping the whole on-chain carbon market.
Excellent proposal and I'll be voting yes for sure, welcome frens 
Wonderful explanation and I fully support the proposal