I have already talked about it, but even the long term investors will suffer of this modulation, because icpmaximalist investors like me and other fellows are both ICP investors and not considering ICP price !
More precisely, a lot of ICP investors don’t look at the price anymore, because they think with an ICP view, through the ICP as a whole ecosystem. So they don’t want to disburse ICP to sell them for fiat, but they want to disburse ICP to evolve into the ecosystem like by buying NFT or use ICP (token) in different manners into ICP (ecosystem). These investors, icpmaximalist, will suffer by being punished for the ICP price, whereas they never intended to sell any ICP but just want to use them as ICP. This proposal forget totally this people, it sees all investors just as investors wanting to sell their ICP, but a lot of current and potential investors are not.
This proposal only consider the passage from a currency to ICP and the return from ICP to another currency. By modulating, it will make these icpmaximalist investors stressed about the moment to disburse, they will use less the disburse and they will less reinject ICP into the ecosystem and eventually the ecosystem will suffer of this circulation slow down. Because as you know, any economy suffers from the fact that people prefer not spend their money rather than inject it back into the economy. It is the same here : you will have investors with ICP, but not injecting ICP to feed the ICP ecosystem anymore.
I think this is an error. This proposal will provoke a loss of spontaneity and circulation of icp, because people will be scary about not disbursing at the optimal moment, whereas they always were just wanting to disburse their ICP (token) as ICP (token) into the ICP (ecosystem).
To recap : this proposal make a distinction disappear : the distinction between pure speculators about ICP and investors who love the ecosystem and disburse their ICP only to use them into the ecosystem. For example, I never sold an ICP since may 2021, but I disburse a lot to use it into the ecosystem, but once such a proposal passed, I won’t do as much as I currently do, because I won’t take the risk of suffer of a price in fiat whereas I am not concerned by this price. By not doing this distinction , the ICP will just be like BTC, an asset to substitute gold, but ICP was designed to be a parallel world where the price crash should not have consequence on the spontaneity to disburse and evolve until the ecosystem. But by adopting this proposal, the ICP will be very alive during the bull run, but during the bear market, nobody will disburse, and the whole ICP ecosystem will slow down. Is this what we want ? An ecosystem slowing down or accelerating depending on the prices trends ? Because you are proposing a correlation between the price of ICP and the ICP fluidity here. It will be very bad to ICP to have its behavior driven by the prices, because people don’t go less on internet when the prices are low… but here, you are preparing the fact that when the price will be low, all the ecosystem activity will be weaker. You are not only incentivizing people to not sell, you are incentivizing to not disburse their ICP to inject them back into the ICP (ecosystem), you will make investors reluctant to disburse icp and making the ecosystem living by consuming into the ICP. Any economy would die of this, a country is ill when people accumulate money but don’t spend and reinject it into the economy. Let us not forget macroeconomical realities.
You never intended to create gold, you wanted to create a sort of gas to drive into the icp. For Gold, people will go toward BTC. ICP never was thought as a token to accumulate and not to disburse, you are supposed to want us to disburse maximally to spend it maximally into the ecosystem and so generate a maximum of circulation. During the bear market, not only the sales will slow down, but also the disbursing and by consequence the whole activity (fed by the icp disbursing and circulating) of the the ecosystem.
In a word, there is a whole world between letting maturity compounding, and spawning it to sell it as ICP : this world is named “ICP” (ecosystem) where we are supposed to live with ICP (token) as an internal “pulse” ; with this proposal, you will kill the circulation of ICP (token) and the development of ICP (ecosystem).
The « you » is not for you @OVVOVVO ! 
but for @jwiegley and @dominicwilliams