Resolving this issue is one of the top 3 issues I see for Hive's growth, recovery and sustainability.
Some points in response to this post:

1. Re - Deciding on who gets to be in a position of power in the ValuePlan/DHF (on rotation): Deciding what to fund and what not to fund - for the good of Hive - is not a simple process. Every person has their own experience and understanding of business, technology, psychology, markets, marketing, reporting, science, maths and on and on. It seems like being in a position where an individual can hand out $5k at will is quite a desirable one for many people. How is voting going to take place for this? Stake weighted voting using a new system that doesn't yet exist? Why would the people put so much time into demonstrating capacity for this role, winning an election and putting time into fulfilling the role if they themselves are not compensated? Are they being compensated? Wouldn't a lack of compensation risk increasing the chances of fraud by these people?

2. Having stakeholders stating their criteria for voting is perhaps a good idea - but how will applicants locate these? There are thousands of stakeholders - how will people know who to examine to find out the key info? Wouldn't this practically require a new website/page just for this info and for applicants to potentially have to reference a large number of accounts? I think this is only practical of there is a way to aggregate the stakeholders' positions for quick reference. e.g. Applicants can see that '30% of the HP support I need for my DHF application can be achieved via stakeholders who say they will vote for proposals that meet my own one's configuration'. This would really require a tool to allow applicants to input the scope of their project and to check in advance. This might also put off applicants if they don't understand that not every stakeholder has provided their voting criteria and that a % of potential DHF voting power cannot be determined in this way.

3. Most people are not very experienced in measuring KPIs and in many cases they are hard to validate externally. We currently lack consistent engagement measurement systems for onboarded accounts, for example. I have made suggestions to Hive account@mcfarhat to include something like this in future updates made by the core team, but for now we got nothing! Standardisation is necessary, which requires a degree of experience in digital marketing that I have never seen any prominent people in Hive demonstrate they possess.

4. I would expect design and implementation of what is needed here to take maybe 6 weeks and to not really be able to measure anything meaningful from it for a while after that.

This is a big subject and comments could extend over 100 pages, but I'll stop here.