But I honestly don't see a reason why we shouldn't use the inflation of STEEM for funding of projects that are going to be valuable for Steem and that are not focusing on making money.
Because you will need to fund these projects indefinitely if they can't stand on their own feet at some point. And with even more projects wanting a piece of the WP pie you will run out of funds fast.
Personally, I was so happy that there finally was starting to be this realisation on the blockchain that the reward pool is not a business model and that projects need to look for outside funding to be sustainable.
Delegation is a good incubator model but the goal should always be that projects stand on their own feet.
Also, you have not provided any examples of proposals we can look forward too when this system is in place. "I'm very certain that..." is just not good enough.
Sorry for being so harsh about it. But this thing will effect everyone on this platform when this HF get's a pass. I for one want to be sure that when it does it's for the right reasons.
I appreciate you taking the time to answer.
I'm with you that businesses should look outside the reward pool for monetization, but I'm not talking about businesses. I'm talking about projects for Steem.
And the examples I've mentioned (steemblockexplorer, steemd, steemworld, dsteem, beempy, etc.) are very clearly projects without any business model. (not every project should have the goal to make money - but that doesn't mean the developer(s) aren't needing money to develop it)
For example, steemworld.org recently introduced donations and while a bit came in (~400-500 STEEM) I wouldn't say that's very much, comparing to 1+ year of development.
I'm not yet sure how it will look like in action as the current sketch is very rough, so I don't feel comfortable to make an example proposal.