Side point: I don't think there's any need for people to buy Hive to defund proposals. I just pointed that is the primary mechanism we have now: stakeholders vote, and the more they hold, the more their vote counts. In other words, there is a clear mechanism for anyone who wants to have more influence in votes (this point was made to address your two-class argument).

But right now most of the DHF proposals are already getting defunded. Certainly faster than we could get a hardfork through that programatically prevents spending. The biggest proposal by far still getting funded is the HBD stabilizer, and it would be complete idiocy to programmatically defund that, IMO, since it actually earns money for Hive.

And if it turns out stakeholders then change their mind and decide they do want to spend, they would be stuck waiting for yet another hardfork to be able to spend again.

The whole proposed mechanism is a bad idea, IMO.