This point is easily fixable and not something we have had control of. But I'm positive there are solutions to solve this issue that don't require getting rid of vouchers. (see linked Alternative Proposal below for an example)
the current use-cases of vouchers are essentially just a reduction of DEC demand, while simultaneously complicating the experience for players that just want to buy things.
So I really dislike this argument: "we have to get rid of vouchers because the team elects to use them as a DEC replacement vehicle". I'm perfectly fine with getting rid of any case where vouchers replace DEC, but that doesn't mean there aren't other ways to provide value to the people that stake their SPS or own Nodes.
Regarding the trust point, I agree that every decision can be passed by a super majority, thus everything in theory is subject to change/elimination. And for this reason I find it super important that we consider the implications of removing an asset entirely.
For me, I understand it is possible to do so, but it will cause me concern about what else could happen in the future. For instance, I have over 100m grain, will that get nerfed one day - is the meta play to sell it before it loses all value and utility in the future? How about research, I am in the top 10, will that be subject to removal if we decide in the future that it took us so long to make a usecase for it and thus it became overproduced? These are concerns that will continue to grow with each decision to remove/alter assets.
In my opinion, we should ALWAYS go out of our way to NOT remove or alter assets if it is at all possible. And if we must do so, then I think it should be done in a way that mitigates the damage in a thoughtful and reasonable manner.
In this case, there are alternative solutions that are far less negative and still achieve the objective stated (to remove the Vouchers replacing DEC). Here's an example of one from @bjangles that has also been floating around: Alternative Proposal
There are many different possibilities to solving the objectives in this prop (ie...stopping the Vouchers from replacing DEC), but I feel that removing/changing an asset should be a last resort. We can and should do better in my opinion, otherwise we are destroying an asset on a whim and that to me will be a breach of trust for all future decisions because how can we tell what will be next to get destroyed. I know I won't be able to figure it out, and that makes me very nervous when it comes to making decisions.
RE: Proposal to Sunset Vouchers into DEC-B (FINAL EDIT DONE - PLEASE READ)