Yes the SPS will be stake based voting and yes the most stake is in the hands of a couple dozen people. Yes technically they could decide what is funded to a point, but I don’t think that makes it useless as most of those accounts disagree and will just counter each other if all else fails. Plus there is a burn post mechanism built it which pretty much burns the funds (good for the ecosystem) in the event that a proposal is submitted that is not beneficial or just that nothing good is there.
Honestly the original idea behind the community foundation and the SPS working together was that the foundation could actually take that input from the community and ensure their voices were heard in the proposals themselves. I’m hoping that still happens.. as while maybe the smaller accounts don’t have the SP alone, when organized together they have the numbers and with a foundation they have a very loud voice. 🙂
Who makes the decision on which proposal is beneficial or not while the large stake holders are arguing over it? Will there be a committee or body that will handle oversight function on the proposal voting process?
There isn’t any arguing, it’s an automated system based on stake based voting. The votes decide. If there is nothing in form of proposal that the majority of stake holders sees as valuable they can vote the burn post etc.
There is a community foundation that has been in the works (@steemalliance) And part of the idea was for the human aspect (foundation) to work alongside the automated aspect (SPS) to balance and help the community’s voice is heard (through organizing etc).
oh that's cool. the community foundation would not be run by witnesses, I hope?
They would be elected officials as well as different sub committees etc. If the initial elections for the temps boards etc are a reflection of what is to come, it would be a good mix of all types of community members as well as an actual open to the public style conversation for decision making etc. The whole entire goal of it is to be community focused.