It is far more important to find like-minded developers than super star developers.
Amir is not like minded, he hates profit motive and company metaphor.
BTC devs have a different philosophy, so we must be careful.
I agree in the sense that the individual skill or personality of a developer will mean little to their overall contribution to the project. However from a marketing and publicity perspective they are crucial. Unless we poach the hardcore bitcoin developers early(ish) we might literally never be able to make the bitcoiners understand, and they might simply go down with their ship and miss the real boat, so to speak.
Additionally the quick early influx of users and capital taking the crypto community will give us will be crucial. Both to the short term gains of investors, who will surely vote for it, and for the overall security of the system. Only if enough money is involved will we be robustly beyond destruction by authorities or criminals. We have too understand that we are going to take heat far, far beyond what bitcoin is currently getting. The western world will cling to the company metaphor and use it to justify a crackdown. China will realize how we are a fundamental threat to the regime once they start to see bitCNY adoption in any quantity.
I think it is imperative that we are as far beyond reach as we can possibly be, when they realize they have to act.
The way I see it, there's definitely nothing to be lost at attempting to cause as much of a stir as possible. As long as our fundementals are impregnable, it will be difficult to tell our story without also exposing why we are better.
If we're able to actually sift through the industry and choose the best developers it will be a massive advantage and will leave our competitors with nothing. In the end I don't see why everyone who is currently running a profitable project in the industry, shouldn't be doing that project but releasing it open source, for free, with bitshares support, and be paid a salary by the blockchain instead.
Instead of capping the inflation per delegate, why don't we cap the total inflation across all delegates? That way a single delegate can earn a lot more if the community accepts it.
This would certainly help to keep the number of independent signers closer to 101. Otherwise we might find ourselves driven toward 25 4-node employees until our market cap quadruples.
I, for one, would definitely never ever consider of voting for anything close to that many multi person delegates. I have faith the majority of stakeholders would agree, and I'm convinced the community will be very good at constantly keeping taps on all the delegates, especially the few of them who will have more responsibility.