Ciao @Alexintosh! Thanks for sharing your feedback here!
I think we need for sure focus on improving the governance part, as it’s the main one, but having also other type of utilities could help thriving a more cohesive ecosystem for IDLE where users can not only partecipate in such governance but also enjoy (with benefits) the products that they are governing. In the end the DAO is needed to govern Idle related products so it should make sense to tie the token also to the products in some way.
Having discounts for those who use the product the most could be an idea, of course it should be carefully weighted to avoid losing too much fees for the DAO, but in this way we are still leaving IDLE and users of Idle products separated, while the idea here I think it’s to try to converge those users, or at least give more benefit to the ones that embrace both IDLE and its products.
That’s for sure something worth considering for the future, especially if we link fees to tranches directly. We are voting right now to pause IDLE buybacks as there were issues with the current implementation see the initial @Biaf comment on this thread.
This is something that was done I think until January of this year but was deemed not really worth it in that form. This is for reference the initial post Idle DAO Governance Mining and this was the analysis that concluded that it was not very effective Governance Mining Program - Retrospective Analysis. Of course if you have other ideas or insights for this, happy to discuss further given your expertise on this!
I find this the most compelling point in the long run, but it means completely redoing the governance from the ground up as we cannot use Governor Bravo for this