There's nothing terribly wrong in theory with what you said, other than missing the sheer magnitude of the return ratio associated with the stabilizer right now. The returns from the stabilizer will let us do far more later and a short term suspension of funding for proposals won't do much harm, by my calculations. I've weighed out the alternatives, and I'm quite certain this is the correct course of action as a temporary measure.
Of course, others can disagree and vote as they will. You'll note that several proposals are still voted in by other people, even though I think it's a mistake to have them voted in right now. I have a lot of influence due to my stake, but it's not overwhelming by any means, clearly.
As a side note, I'm wary of using analogies too freely, because they often lead to mistakes in thinking when the two systems are not completely analogous. Developers and software development for the most part function quite differently from an ammo box and a gun. In other words, I see no likelihood of the fouling you reference.
Analogies can have their uses when first communicating the functioning of a new system to people unfamiliar with the system, but continued use after that just leads to improper conclusions due to the increasing chance of model mismatches, IMO. For example, whenever I hear a business guy start using sports analogies to promote his ideas instead of presenting a business-based analysis, I start to question how well he knows how businesses function.
The fouling is in regards to a bear market. If BTC tanks, of which there's a non-zero chance, then HIVE could very well be back in the $0.12 range again. I'm not saying that it's likely, or making wild predictions, all I'm saying is looking at the chart right now is not indicative of all possibilities. And if, and this is a big if, HIVE reaches $0.12 again, then even a 3:1 average trade of HIVE:HBD would be a huge net loss.
To be clear, I think stabilizing HBD is a worthy goal, and the DHF has room for funding it. But there's risk and also trust involved. Having a decent peg would provide a lot of trust for merchants to use the currency, but the long history has shown that HBD is unreliable for anyone thinking of using it for their business. This project isn't going to go far to build that trust back, even if it works flawlessly. It can however provide data to contribute to a programmatic solution, and that's where I really see the value.
Putting all eggs in this basket has some obvious upside, but that's all it's marketed as is upside, without the slightest hint of a potential downside. There's a good chance that I don't understand the inner workings of the DHF's HIVE to HBD conversions in the background, and that even if HIVE goes to 12 cents we can still come out ahead on this deal. If I'm way off, I would appreciate being corrected, even without going into details.
With all that said, your other point you made elsewhere about projects being overfunded for a short while hasn't gone on deaf ears. The funding has been paying out ~2X the amount they were asking for, so a short break isn't going to hurt anything. My intention with this post and conversation is mainly informing people before it hurts anything, rather than waiting til it gets to that point.
The haircut mechanism was established to mitigate the risk of an excess amount of HBD created during a bull market resulting in severe dilution. Despite it's negative impacts, I think it serves that purpose fairly well.