Agreed, though I believe folks under estimate the effort required to maintain enough context to peform, particularly given proposals have a habit of making it to proposal stage after a load of synchronous conversations have happened the stewards we not involved in. My general view is to perform this role as is the stewards would need to be active contributors vs elected members as: a) they’d have context and b) they’d already be being rewarded by and committed to, the DAO.
It is at the moment given the way it works though it wasn’t always that way and hasn’t always been that way since the current model was implemented - I think people don’t feel their involvement in Governance matters for a variety of reasons and also a lot of the more exciting decisions happen outside of governance. Press Start Cap x Developer DAO Fellowship is a good example of a high-level of engagement, hypothesis being it was something interested to members that directly benefit them vs empowering a small group to make decisions on their behalf.
My personal views is a mixture of the written word and sync sessions is the ideal (similar to how we used to do this) as people prefer different forms of discussion/debate/decision making, plus having a written async record is far easier for folks to follow along vs solely meetings between a small subset of humans
Love to see any actionable ideas/proposal brought forward for another way, experimentation even if only a small scale would be very valuable learning .
They weren’t issue and we need to back date the CODE forwards for the existing stewards (that’s on me)