I have been talking to a number of investors on Hive that closely follow the current state of the DHF that have been critical of some things that are ongoing when it comes to developer work.
As someone that is a part of the community and not a very technical guy I have no way to vet if any of what they are saying is true or not. I have commited a lot of work to Hive and done it all for free, which I continue to do so, so in a way these criticisms can be concerning to me.
I can understand if a project doesnt succeed or things dont go the way they should but I don't agree with anyone trying to take advantage.
I dont know if that is the case right now, but in the past we had developers, one I remember, like Netouso, that took tens of thousands of dollars from the DHF and bragged how he was sitting on his ass all day and not delivering much.
Many other developers got really mad about it.
I very much hope that is not the case nowadays because I know many of these devs and some are the best people I have ever met.
So I would really like, if there are any Hive developers willing to speak up and maybe look through Gitlab commits, what certain developers delivered and see if any of the current active proposal makers are taking in observably more money than they should for the work they do.
Best case they simply increase their work effectiveness.
Does the unavailability of developers willing to do the work justify that kind of spending if it is indeed true?
Is there any merit to those claims or are they completely unsubstantiated?
Would it be possible to have developers on Hive to keep check and hold each other accountable if something like that happens?
I know people dislike conflict but even if any of that leads to increased productivity I think that would be beneficial to everyone.
So ill ping a few people I trust to know a lot more than I do so they can maybe shed some light on this hopefully, if they are willing to explain their view on things. 
That applies to anyone down on the funded lists below. If anyone is willing to chip in.
I think consistency of github commits are a measure for work done in some cases.
I fully understand that most of these proposals list the things they do in updates but what Im looking for is seeing what other devs think that are doing observations themselves.
