I recently proposed two generalized extensions to BIP9 to enable "user activation" of soft forks.
uaversionbits-strong – under this proposal, if activationtime is set, and 95% miner signalling is not reached by activationtime, the workflow transitions to PRE_LOCK_IN, followed by LOCKED_IN then ACTIVE. This second proposal allows extra business logic to be added, allowing for example, orphaning of non-signalling blocks.
I believe one of these two proposal should move to published BIP stage. I prefer the latter. to be clear, they are generalized deployment extensions to BIP9.
Lastly, due to popular request, I drafted a third proposal to cause the mandatory activation of the existing segwit deployment that is being ignored by Chinese mining pools in particular. Under this proposal, if miners have not activated segwit by October 1st, nodes will reject non-signalling blocks (meaning they wont get paid unless they signal for segwit activation). Assuming 51% of the hashrate prefers to get paid it will cause all NODE_WITNESS nodes to activate including all versions of Bitcoin Core from 0.13.1 and above. This proposal requires exchanges in particular to run the BIP in order to create the financial incentivizes for mining pool operators to signal for segwit. I believe, for this proposal to move forward, it should progress to a published BIP because there is no way for exchanges, other economic actors as well as the technical community to even consider the proposal until there is something more concrete. This proposal (ML discussion) has already garnered quite a bit of media attention.
I understand Reddit is not the best place to garner feedback or discussion, but as I have already published on the Bitcoin Development Protocol discussion list, and there have been various discussion on various social media platforms, I think a Reddit post is a way to get some more discussion going.