I agree, but i think this is true when we are bigger. In the meantime, i suggest we form committes tasked with individual goals - ie. The user interface, on/off ramps, building our own exchange etc. These can be disolved quickly when the task is complete.
I think JP is correct that we gave an element of paralysis. My poi t is, lets form task forces, hire the people, get it done and disolve them.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I agree with you, DPOS as a governance model is brilliant that doesn't mean it can't be reviewed and made more efficient. First the ways decision makers are elected and removed must be addressed e.g votes should be made to expire so that proxies and committee members can be accountable and only people with passion to grow bitshares are elected, this i believe with make the community more engaging as proxies and committee members will be forced to make them selves known to the community engaging and debating, sadly this is not the case. Secondly bitshares needs a management structure designed in a way nobody can be targeted, i will propose like a few people have done that committees be set up to managed every aspect of the management structure selected from proxies committee members and active community members. They will work for about 6 months and others take over so we can have fresh ideas at all times. I believe these things can be done now with the bitshares foundation coordinating. Let's imagine promoting other bitassets the way hero is going to be promted at the same time and in a short time we have 4 bitassets in the top 20. Where do you think bitshares will be. My only worry has been that if we delay or do nothing this tech that we love so much can be forked and some other persons enjoy its potentials.
I completely agree! Thanks for the comments!