What I find most interesting about the Hive decentralised fund is that it's the most unblockchain like part of the chain.
Take @justineh's proposal, I'm sure that'll get funded because I know how well connected she is - but there's no actual proof of the work she did on the chain is there, just a claim to a proof of work in her proposal, which outlines off chain work which was only 'witnessed' by a few.
Now this isn't meant as a criticism, I trust Justineh, and those witnesses who are no doubt going to vote for her proposal, and I don't see a way around this, but this isn't a trust less reward system verified by evidence of work on a blockchain, is it!
I think we just need to be up front about these things - maybe sell it as a strength - evidence of the fact that Hive is a truly social blockchain, because without the social trust in the background, and off-chain, those exchange listings may never have happened!
I think a lot of the same goes on with which Dev proposals are getting funded - people subjectively voting based on who 'stepped up' in the last couple of months.
Hive is people who work together based on old-school trust, who reward each other via a blockchain - the block chain is really secondary to the offline social contacts, right? I mean being a Discord regular I'm guessing you're going to agree with that!
So this leaves me with the fact that the chain is really just a technical tool so what you're suggesting about funding all the background technical stuff first, that makes complete sense!
Interesting perspective. You're absolutely right that there's a layer of trust that's built upon this trustless system. But I think that's the key for the future of any blockchain, the trustless layer isn't secondary, it's the prerequisite to building the trust layers on top.