Thanks for the feedback and taking the time to read through it!
Note that PFI does not mean inclusion. Being proposed for inclusion is what opens the floor for feedback, not what closes it. But yes, this EIP does aim for Hegotá, for two reasons.
First, the topic is not new, and there is plenty of time to discuss it. Discussions and feedback will have several months to take place (starting now 
). It’s worth mentioning that we discussed a similar proposal back in 2024, and the wider debate has been running since 2023 and much of the literature is collected at issuance.wtf.
Second, the clock is ticking. Waiting for I* or later effectively means abandoning the change. The primary goal of this EIP is security and capture-resistance, which is met by the burn fully cancelling issuance at 50%: issuance no longer incentivises staking beyond that ratio. The arithmetic argues strongly against delaying, even under conservative projections. Validator entry is rate-limited by the protocol, and the activation queue has been running at essentially that maximum for a while already. If entry stays saturated every epoch and few stakers exit, by January 1, 2028 more than 70M ETH will be staked (north of 55% of the supply).
Acting now means the market settles into an equilibrium below 50% but acting after the overshoot means correcting a much larger imbalance, with more stake forced to exit and more disruption for every participant. The gentle path is only available now.
It is also worth noting that this king of reform gets harder every month. A larger staked base means a larger constituency earning fees on the status quo. The previous issuance debates already showed how effectively that pressure can stall a proposal.
Proposing the change now means we have enough time to review it, and that the correction stays soft: the reduction phases in over 18 months, plus the usual lead time from scheduling, giving participants on the order of two years to adjust.