Very sad to see that not even one delegate would like to respond. I hope they are as active as when they are asking for votes...
I saw two respond in the thread and suggested there needed to be improvements for the burn to ensure proper identification. You might have missed them, but they are there.
Besides this, during the last Beyond Bitcoin meeting Friday this was discussed with BM. It was suggested a possible framework for reporting could be created to standardize it. Makes sense.
However, every project is different in the frequency of their updates. Do you really want daily updates that basically say.. debuged this, 50 lines of code today, did this, did that each day? For some progress might be measured in strategic meetings and events that span months. So while the framework would make total sense so that we can index and keep track of it all, the frequency would really depend on what it requires. I think it is fair to have the delegate from the start declare their planned update frequency. If this is found deficient then it can be brought up. If still not satisfactory then they start to lose votes obviously.
Just a few things to consider... transparency is a no brainer.. efficiently executing on how that is delivered without overburdening will take some finesse.