I agree with you that a centralized team could be more efficient. But that doesn't mean the same goal can't be achieved in een decentralized manner.

The witnesses aren't a centralized team and that's working great. The uptime since the fork has been so much better than for the last couple of years.

There are witnesses that are working harder than others and that will also still be the case with a centralized dev team.

While I agree with your focus from a business perspective I don't feel it has to be centralized and 'controlled' by someone who has a large stake.

If feel all the seperate efforts of the developers are already unified to some extend.

It's just that we need more accountability towards people receiving funds for proposals.

@netuoso was providing updates until two weeks ago. I don't know if he is not here due to personal reasons and I would like to give him the freedom to explain what is going on. If development has stopped but he still receives funds it is only fair that a proper solution is provided.

And yes, I think that the quality control for proposals has already improved since the fork, mainly because of people like yourself who don't feel it is fair for letting the dao pay out for underperformance. If we get more people to understand how proposals and the development of the eco system works, you will get more people holding the devs accountable for their work.

But tbh... most of us don't even have the slightest clue what is going on. We don't understand the technical side of hive.

Posted using Dapplr