I don't see the point to making your hours essentially random. If you want to work more, make another or a bigger proposal.

I don't necessarily "want" to work more, I think 15-20 hours is a sweet spot that I've liked for the past year for my work/life balance. I feel like it's only fair for stakeholders that I work more if the dhf pays me more in usd value. Also this comes at the right time as I'm spending far more than my usual 15-20 working to get rc delegation ready in time. (I would have worked those hours anyways to get it shipped in time but it feels good to not work for free)

just a way of sending back the any funding above what is needed to complete the proposal, and doing so precisely at the times (higher HBD price) when stakeholders and HBD can most benefit from that funding going to @hbdstabilizer (or the equivalent).

While I agree I also feel like stakeholders benefit more in the long run from increased worker output (if that applies to the specific proposal) than from some extra money being used to buy hive and then locked.

@blocktrades has elsewhere stated his views that the benefits of buying HIVE and channeling that into the DHF fund are too great at high HBD prices to forgo, but the script normalizes this a lot by sending back in those times when the price is higher.

Which is totally fair imho. I don't think the other approaches are wrong in any way, and for a lot of proposals, it's the best one. But for some proposals that can "extend" to have more output like peakd, keychain or mine, we may get equal or greater value by getting more work done.