As you may know from 
He was earning this kind of money even though there was no activity from him for quite some time. With the attention these posts received one of
I would like to thank
Some of you had some great ideas that could actually make the HIVE proposal system better. Can you please check it out 
The DAO should make an initial payment for development and then the rest for objetives accomplished, not for month, the way it is now is a joke to the accountability of the blockchain, easily manipulated by whales. If we don't change this system now Hive never will take off. -
@palasatenea
The current system relies too much on the recipient being honest, the supervision lax and the decision making being decentralized (which it isn't, yet). -
@markkujantunen
I say: Result-Based Proposals, and paid after a satisfactory or proven outcome. -
@smasssh
There needs to be an elected police for hive. Hive auditors. A check and balance system. As of now, it's a popularity contest with no assessment on value received. Real companies have earning reports and have to show stakeholders how projects have driven results. -
@cryptoknight12
Many of our problems could be fixed by a voting decay in my opinion. Not all of them, but some of them for sure.
We for example still have a problem with the witness voting that nobody is talking about. From our top 100 witnesses there are exactly 9 disabled, which means they don't produce blocks anymore and are pretty much just taking the spots for witnesses that would actually want to secure the blockchain.
A disabled witness looks like this.
It will stay like this maybe for the eternity because there's no voting decay and these disabled witnesses just have too much votes. This also makes it hard for the new blood to compete. Some of our current witnesses wouldn't probably even be in the top 100 if they wouldn't have these very old casted votes.
What do you think?
