.2. Hmm. I’ll need to revisit this, I don’t think I’m asking my question the right way. I’m wondering how you’ll approach neutrality when employed by the Foundation. I probably know more than most about the DAO Admin Team because of my interactions with them on my submitted SIPs, and even I don’t fully understand how they’re run, who they report to, what they’re influenced by, and what their goals truly are. They are a mostly unknown entity to the community…so I don’t know how “objectivity & neutrality” is achieved when I’ve observed that the DAO Admin Team has its own goals and desires that it’s acted upon. Not sure how to phrase the question better, but I think it’ll get clearer when I do my Sandbox Foundation podcast in the next few days. It’ll spell out my understanding of the relationship between all the entities involved and what part I think the Articles, Memos, and Constitution plays 
.3. Hahahahahahahaha, very good, very good 
.4. Fair enough! I think my question kinda got answered by Geraldine’s RFP post. I’m a bit impressed to be honest. I didn’t expect the DAO Admin Team to send RFPs to the community instead of waiting for SIPs to come to them. Feels like the mechanism to “reinforce the type of SIPs in line with that approach”.
.6. Sounds good!
.10. 
.11. The short answer is yes. The long answer is: I can pull some timestamped May/June AMAs with Seb and Cyril about their explanation of “Progressive Decentralization,” and it seemed pretty clear that their plan was to hand over most, if not all, decision-making power to the DAO. I didn’t hear that some would be transferred. If your usage of “some” was intentional because you’ve been made aware of how Progressive Decentralization will unfold, then I have questions as to how that change came about.
.12.