Ok so there is tendency of people to react in a manner that is related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion .. (whether you notice it empirically or read some sociology studies) .. This is a very well understood cognitive bias.
The problem here is that people are by nature horrible at determining what they are losing versus what they are gaining because of subconcious cognitive biases. This comes into play when voting for a diluting delegate.
Background -
I was never against the dilution idea, but also not 100% for it. One thing that is for certain is once we crossed that line we need to take full advantage of it. At this point vote in anyone who has shown a positive volunteerism. These people without a doubt producing value.
Result
So please please consider your cognitive biases and try your best to weight out the pros and cons. If we make 50% mistakes voting people in, but the other 50% are really solid members of the chain gang - then BTS wins immensely.
Peronally
Please try to understand the value equation and do not be scared of inflation at this point. The people motivated to run at this point are all solid supporters of BTS.
Please comment.
Let's have a Strategy Day, pick a day in the coming month, when as many delegates as possible should put up a proposal on a dedicated board for the community to provide feedback on, which could include supporting another idea or delegate. This might open our minds up and push the conversations along a bit.
There is a sub-forum dedicated to this. I know TonyK put his in General but there is a forum for this so postponing things until next month isn't really needed. The inflation is here, now we need to start organizing it. As it is, a fully diluting delegate just simply isn't worth worrying about at this point.
I am not saying that you vote random people in who show up. That is part of the problem. A good hustler will just tell you guys exactly what you want to hear, so in effect proposals aren't even that meaningful in keeping out bad actors.
It will be just as easy to remove someone .. Ok they get an extra $1000 USD. Everyone would like a free $1000, but that is not a $1000 loss to you. We lose much more by not hiring people than we do by hiring a few too many people.
In a normal corporation you have all sorts of inefficient people. Our efficiency will still blow that out of the water.
The only real thing we have to worry about is when our market cap grows, but by then we've started winning !!!
It makes no sense to sit there and twiddle our thumbs and shoot people down. Maybe ask more of them but this "I only want developers" is not good. Well who is going to evangelize?
We also need to not be hindered by the vocal minority.
I am not saying hire random people, but people who were contributing before for free should be given leeway.
For example Fuz declined taking higher paying job because he wouldn't be available on fridays!