I believe that the regulatory environment is cyclic, and dev threads are no exception. Perhaps today there are complaints about too much red tape, but in the future some event (or multiple such events) may force to reintroduce some red tape, gradually and in event-dependent manners, I know, until we find ourselves in another state where excessive red tape becomes an issue.
Oh and it would be a good idea to have a clear list of what requires dev threads and what doesn't. IIRC for the Codex we have: Sithspawn, elite units (or elite-level individual NPCs), restricted materials custom planets, Force-nexi that cover regions (rather than just a single building), well-defended fortresses.
Nevertheless I feel that it would help to tweak dev requirements for ships. It's usually clear what dev above the baseline would get a ship: 10 posts can get +2 armament or defense, -2 speed or maneuverability or 1 extra squadron - however, for hyperdrive there is no consensus. As for the ships/stations above 1000m: if one could remove the restriction on the number of writers required (and maybe even just reduce by 10 posts the requirements on each ship bracket size found in the 1000-3000m range)... the Lucrehulk-X case, which was subbed by my alt Jessica, proved us how the 3-writer requirement for ships in the 2400-3000m size is a liability, so it would become the following (no restriction on the total number of writers):
Ships under 1700m would not require development
Ships over 1700m require a minimum of 10 posts
Ships over 2400m require a minimum of 20 posts
Of course, stations over 3000m would still have a 10-post increment for each kilometer in excess of 3000m. Flagships, however, would require 3 different writers with 100 posts total, and no need of a specific flagship thread...
Can anyone link to me the 30-post fence please?