Variable system of staking interest rates that takes into account governance participation rates, number of votes, etc.

I am a non-English speaking person. I am using machine translation.
Sorry if it is hard to read.
Also, the discussion is triggered by the movement of a particular person, but I do not intend to attack that person and do not wish to have such a discussion.

I've brought up similar issues in the past, but I'd like to hear your current thoughts.

Unfortunately, the price of INTR keeps falling, and the atmosphere within the community has deteriorated significantly. Amidst this, a major INTR holder has declared that they will vote against all proposals until certain conditions are met. As for the merits of this action, I'm not particularly critical, and it's not the focus of this discussion.

This individual claims to hold nearly 1.8 million INTR, a significant amount, but the current total vINTR stands at 70 million vINTR. The key point here is that the figure of approximately 1.8 million represents less than 3% of the total. However, in reality, this figure poses a significant threat, as many proposals are expected to fail in the future. Why? Well, because there are too many users who stake but otherwise remain inactive, solely focused on staking rewards.

The original purpose of the INTR token is to incentivize participation in the vault and for governance purposes. For ordinary users, governance is the crucial aspect of the INTR token. Earning interest is secondary; the primary purpose should be governance. However, it's not being used that way.

Currently, all the proposals I've seen regarding "proposals" seem beneficial. However, in the future, what if malicious proposals are deliberately made to benefit only specific individuals, especially if that person holds 5 million INTR? We are not adequately prepared to handle such attacks. The fact that around 1.8 million INTR poses a threat is the threat we are facing.

As a community, I believe efforts are needed to increase active users, regardless of whether they are in favor or against. Active participation in voting and vigorous discussions are necessary.

So, what can we do? I've considered two radical proposals. By combining them, I believe we can improve the quality of users.

1. Halve staking rewards and distribute the remaining half only to participants based on their governance participation, even if it's just once a month. Non-participants indirectly pay for the correct judgments made by those actively involved in governance. Those who dislike this proposal would be forced to participate in governance by voting against it. However, since they might not be interested in governance in the first place, it might unknowingly pass.

2. Accelerate the reduction rate of vINTR and the unstaking period based on the governance participation rate. Similar to the previous proposal, this idea assumes that if INTR tokens are necessary for governance, those who only stake without participating in governance are considered to have forfeited the vINTR required for governance participation. Additionally, those who have long-term locked INTR but change their minds and want to exit Interlay can intentionally reduce their vINTR by not participating in governance, allowing them to unlock their staking sooner. Even if someone becomes negative towards Interlay, if they've locked in for, say, four years, they won't be able to escape the current situation. During that time, they'll continue to speak negatively about Interlay for those four years. This would leave a bad impression on the community and other investors, benefiting both existing and those wanting to exit holders.

There's a risk of the project growing significantly while governance remains sparse. Let's keep bringing forward more good ideas if you have any.