On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
[...] And if changes were proposed to this present system, who (or what entity) would approve and implement them?
The community, by consensus, for approval. Whoever chose to participate and was allowed to do so, for implementation.
Part of the greater problem is that self-selection by interest (our current mechanism for involvement in change and implementation) does not select for competence or for agreement with the consensus (or with what the consensus stands for).
We lack a functional dictator (or president) to cut the knot and enact efficiently; Jimmy might be able to do so, but burned a lot of his "street cred" with the community writ large with the incident that led to reductions in founder bit authority. I personally disagree with that, but I see a clear problem with community accepting his fiat now. Facing any significant opposition his position would not be an effective tiebreaker.