Well, it's an interesting discussion, but I'm pretty sure there is no liability without power?
Legally speaking, a Director's power is clear - they have full authority to bind the organization. (if their signature didn't matter, we wouldn't need them...)
Meanwhile, a Treasurer has the power and liability associated with holding wallet keys for a warchest.
No doubt the DAO will work to create operating principles to attempt to limit excessive power for both positions, and that is good.
We've already got a good start, with the multi-sig process for Treasurers.
But the unfortunate reality is that any operating risk mitigations become less effective when power is centralized, or where collusion is possible.
Hopefully we can do that effectively. It's an important discussion, and that's why we have a legal fund now :)
For the n’th time; there is NO power associated with this position
Well, the natural conclusion of your statement is "any director would do because there is no power." I respect your conviction but suggest you reflect on it further.
You certainly have more at stake here than many of us and will be a major determinant of the final appointees. I'll leave you to it. VONAK good sir.
I have reflected on it enough, as this is my idea.
I suggest you reflect on it.
Also a life advice: I know it is hard to do it in crypto space, where it seems everyone is out to get you; but,
please assume positive intent from others.
You will see that will improve your quality of life and help you become more successful in whatever that you do.