Evan,

We are already at the next stage with the elected board.  The board members are the masternodes.  They have a stake in the company(investment in Dash) so they make the best decision for Dash.  I see the only way this works efficiently is to keep the masternodes in control of voting for how funds are allocated to which projects, which is really the only driver to make people work anyway.

There is no need to worry about expansion.  We pay a company/person directly to do a job - they internally manage themselves.  They know that if they are not productive they will not be paid.  And if any of their employees fail they can be replaced as an internal decision.  I suggested that we could add the option to split this payment up into several dash addresses with a ratio determined by the proposal owner.   This would allow the funds to go directly to all company personnel at once without needing additional involvement from the proposal owner.

A typical company will have a board of directors, but many are inside directors with stock options or a share in the company. This encourages them to act in the best interest of the company.  If we have the employers/project managers/elected board the only worry they have is not getting their salary.  If there are 10 members of this proxy voting party, each one would have the equivalent to the vote of 360 masternodes(total risk of $2.3 Million) - their risk is only losing future income.

I also see an issue with the concept of a consensus with a management decision to determine if an expense is covered.  The entire premise of this cool voting system that we have now is that the masternodes vote on what we fund.  If managers start making decisions, no doubt the 'budget' they need to pay these expenses will keep increasing and expenses will always be paid...because managers don't have any collateral on the line.  And who would make the decision to buy something in advance if the expense could be rejected.  All potential expenses and projects should be voted in upfront so there is no question about if they will be paid or not.  The entire reason we vote is because some projects or expenses will not be paid.

And the last point, if you have set of managers/employers hiring all the 'employees' what traits do we look for in these people?  Isn't this a total guess?  If we fund a solar farm powering X11 ASICs to donate to the foundation, would any of them have a clue where to start.  Do we now need to hire a manager expert to manage that project?  It seems crazy right?  It would make more sense to take bids from several companies - they all submit projects to the budget system.  Look at the past history, pricing, and products they propose installing.  Then masternodes vote on the best option and leave the micromanaging to the company experts that are paid for doing the work.