I already wrote my opinion in an earlier comment, but looking at how the discussion has unfolded so far, there seem to be very few views as disruptive as mine.
It feels like many people are leaning toward Plan B, but I think we need to look more closely at the root of the problem.
Up to now, the reason dApp Staking has been criticized ultimately comes down to poor token performance. In searching for the cause of that, dApp Staking has become the main target. As I’ve written before, since the supply–demand balance directly affects ASTR’s price performance, thinking naturally gravitates toward improving inflation, which is the primary source of supply.
If ASTR’s performance were strong, these kinds of arguments probably wouldn’t be happening at all (or at least they would be much quieter). Of course, in such a scenario, the listed dApps would likely have shown much better activity as well—but that’s another matter.
That said, the main contributors on this forum are not developers, but general community members. Looking at the flow of the discussion so far, it’s clear that support for continuing developer rewards through dApp Staking mainly comes from developers themselves, or from people with a similar mindset. Ideally, developers from listed projects should be actively voicing their opinions in a place like this, but so far that has hardly happened. In that sense, if developers are not proactively engaging here, then moving forward with something like Plan B could be considered reasonable in its own way.
However, as mentioned earlier, I believe the path that led us here is essentially:
“ASTR performance is poor → reduce sell pressure from inflation → reduce developer rewards.”
The argument that “listed projects are not contributing enough to the ecosystem” does have some validity, but if that were the main issue, it could simply be addressed by delisting them quickly. While such opinions do exist, they don’t seem to be the majority.
In the end, most of the voices here are from general holders, and even if they aren’t consciously aware of it, I feel that the conclusion of “reducing developer rewards” is being reached under the premise of “protecting one’s own interests while reducing sell pressure.”
If that weren’t the case, it would be very strange that almost no one is analyzing the situation based on actual inflation figures, as I have.
We really need to think carefully about “what we are trying to improve in the first place.”
Cutting developer rewards alone will hardly change ASTR’s performance. Making protocol changes driven by emotion is unlikely to lead to good outcomes.
If we truly want to change the environment surrounding ASTR, I believe bold changes are necessary (not necessarily my proposal). That said, major changes take time, so introducing something like Plan B as an interim step does make sense.
In any case, we need to analyze the root causes—both emotional and structural—and then consider effective measures.
At least from my perspective, Plan B does not solve the core issues, and while I do see similar opinions in this thread, they seem more like compromises than real solutions.