In BitShares, absolute control is fully decentralized down to the votes of every single atomic BTS larimer*.  You can't get more decentralized than that.

This video style is awesome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW60h6oZzms

 I could script a couple of things that it must have, but ad hoc comments work well too.   But we need someone in Virginia to shoot that.     It would be awesome.

It has been talked about before, but a solution to this would be to have slates stored on-chain, have slates be linked to user accounts, and let users delegate their voting power to a given user account's slate. (Basically an implementation of RDPOS.)

This way, a 'hiring manager' would not even need to be a delegate, just someone who owns a user account that has a slate. He could run for being a delegate as well, of course.

This may lead to something that can be labeled as centralization (everyone just gives their votes to bytemaster), however it is centralization that is approved in a decentralized way, and is easily reversible unlike the locked-in centralization in Bitcoin due to mining.

Ways to help minimize the centralization that occurs:

1. Allow a percentage of your voting power to vote for a particular slate
2. The ability to give your voting power to more than one slate
3. Slates can contain slates
4. The ability to maintain a percentage of your voting power manually

What this means:

Let's say I trust bytemaster, so I give you 40% of my voting power (40 votes). I also love what hpenvy is doing, and I know his votes will be up-to-date with the latest onramp and bizdev developments, so I give him 40% of my voting power as well (40 votes). The remaining 20% (21 votes) I keep to myself and use to vote for my own delegates.

Now, let's look at bytemaster's slate. Since he is very informed of the delegate campaigns overall, he has manually selected 60 delegates to vote for (60% of voting power). Since he cannot keep up with all the marketing efforts, he gives 10% of his votes to MethodX, 10% of his votes to hpenvy. He has left 20% of his voting power unused.

I could go on and describe hpenvy's slate, MethodX's slate, etc, however I think you get the picture here.


There are clearly things that need to be worked out with this model:
1. How to distribute votes among a subset of a user's slate (if I vote for 1% of bytemaster's slate, who in his slate gets the lucky single vote?)
2. How to handle recursive slates (bytemaster gives 20% of his slate to hpenvy, and hpenvy gives 20% of his slate to bytemaster)
3. How to handle incomplete slates (if I give 20% of my voting power to someone with only 10 delegates selected, do they get 2 votes or all 10?)
4. Blockchain bloat, processing overhead?

I do think though, that with some thought that these things can be worked out reasonably. Input appreciated.

Andreas is such a great teacher that he is personable without smiling even once

His short answer to the question What is a DAC? here is also brilliant,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGSePa9GwxA

I am going to let them know they have to manage their own PR as well.

Brian will be here this week so I will pressure him.

Translation：

我会让他们（Brian）管理他们自己的公关形象。
Brian这个星期会来这里，我会给他增加压力。

I think the biggest low hanging fruit that could improve bitshares right now would be dissolving the official marketing team. Bitmarket is solid and doing real work, and should stay. I think this is due to the fact that he found the community on his own and the thing that primarily drives him is his passion for crypto.

Brian and murderistic seem to be motivated only by money, as evidenced by the fact that they haven't spent any of the millions of BTS given to them from the AGS fund, and murderistic even thought it would be appropriate to make a new delegate and ask for MORE funds! Me and and literally every person I've spoken to personally in this community would feel so much better if they were absolved of their duties and the AGS funds were either given to someone else, or just burned and thus given back to the community (who can manage funding on its own through the vastly superior system of delegate funding anyway).

I'd even be happy if Brian simply got to keep all the millions of BTS he has already received. I just don't think its good for this community to rely on him in any way any more. It's more a question of respect and loyalty to the community than anything else, and I think it has been proven beyond any doubt that he simply doesn't posses it. Even if he suddenly started delivering (which at this point I highly doubt) as a stakeholder I wouldn't feel comfortable having him in a position of trust in the community.

I think this is how 99% of the community feels. The reason why there has been so relatively little dissent (considering how strongly people feel this) is because more than anything else this community trusts bytemaster. But it's time to face reality and realize that Brian and murderistic have to go, no matter how hard and uncomfortable it is to admit.