I don't know what would be the right APR, and probably nobody does, we all play the guessing game here, as for the most thing in life :)
But I don't think constantly tinkering parameters is a good thing, and the overall uncertainty that we have with this parameter. Can we try and propose some type of rules and mechanics that will give predictability to the HBD APR and how it is determined, and have this set in code?
At the end the HBD APR is secondary when it comes to the health of HBD and HIVE, the haircut rule is the ultimate protection and the ruler of the system.
Personally, I think this sort of decision needs to stay in the hands of witnesses, where it is public and transparent.
The witnesses answer directly to the community, via stake-weighted voting.
This is exactly as it should be, imho.
If @gtg lowers the APY and enough stakeholders unvote him as witness, he will reconsider.
Also, keeping important parameters at the witness level allows extremely quick responses to attacks and other potential problems.
Like a proposal that never expires and is updated every month or two and has the following options:
If the up wins, increase the apr to 0.5-1%, If the Keep wins, just let it untouched, and if the Down wins reduce the apr -0.5-1%.
And some mechanism so that you can 'keep' your vote without having to renew it after each reset. But that after a year it expires and you have to vote again manually (in case of lost keys, death, etc).
This way the APR would be predictable within a timeframe of 6-12 months more or less, and it would be ideal to increase it as we 'feel' the peak of the bull market approaches to incentivize the people to sell before the inevitable crash and reduce it as we bottom out to incentivize people to move to HP.
As I see it, we have two options with a dynamic APR:
If we have time-specific lock-up vaults, then no investor will ever complain about changing APYs, because it's not changing for their already-committed investments.
When I lock up money in a CD, I don’t care if the bank cuts interest rates on new CDs, at least not until mine matures.
That's the way HBD APY should operate.
A semidinamic apr sounds good, as long as it doesn't make the code less secure, of course.
Anyway, let's see how the HBD debate ends
All for debate ... on another note, some might argue that going in the opposite directions with the HBD APR, from the second point I described above in the semidinamic case is actually better .... example, high debt = high HBD APR, not the opposite, this to stimulate more funds into the ecosystem ... its a whole game theory and monetary policy that we are talking about :)