If they know what is in their financial and professional interest they better defer to wisdom, knowledge, experience and their own limits. They should be happy to have someone on board with the required expertise, its a learning opportunity and an opportunity for them to watch an learn and not get involved in decisions they can’t reasonably add to.
You picked about the toughest example possible, artist and all. But if you were able to bring in other smart people, maybe friends of yours (would be nepotism except for the equality bit) maybe they would demonstrate taste and judgement and humility and not engage in the urge to sabotage.
The whole point is to get rid of that. You and me on the same team. You’re a professional programmer, business owner, operations expert accountant. Many hats, and I have a different skill set. If I am not a fool I am not going to a. interrupt b. arrogate c. ask questions or attempt to contribute unless there seems like a likelihood of gain for both of us. And lets say you as the sole expert in the domain get sick one day, with some over the phone instruction I might be able to limp along through a few days.
Lets turn this around a bit. Lets say MaidSAFE understands that its needs to produce a SAFE phone for real because that turns out to be the only way forward. They need to do this on a shoe string. After five years of forum experience with you and a measure of familiarity and confidence they ask you join them to help get the operations side of the project running. You agree. Now you and David are on the same team. You’ve asked him questions before in the forum and made contributions (for free damnit! because it was for the good of us all, the profit was the potential success of the project.) Now that you’re on the same team you’re not going to start as a matter of routine trying to override him on crypto stuff nor he you on operations- that’s how you lose good people. But in the blinded forum you might learn something from each other and no one will lose face or professional standing. And there will be the outside forum I am guessing something like what Sam_UK pointed to with Loomio which is more of a regular forum. I think part of the anonymity thing is getting at what John Rawls was talking about- there is a place in critical considerations for a different kind of perspective taking.
I see these a the kind of groups that form spontaneously when a problem has to be solved no matter what without regard for other concerns. This would be generalizing it a bit. If a small cooperative’s niche evaporates it will have to retool or dissolve. These would be very focused entities. This kind of focus is of course already present in the corporate world with little machine shops and S corps etc. Here I think its just following what should be the natural arrangement between pros with deep skill sets who come together. It takes humility but when you’re really successful you’re associated with people you’re proud to know and people you can learn from. If you’ve got junior people experience wise, its great because its almost part of any human’s development path to share what they know and it makes them better at what they do. And if you’re junior and care about your life or those who depend on it take that gift.
This is not an alien model, its a bit like what the guilds had, but it can be smaller flatter groups now. This is the familial developmental model on the say the farm. Eventually the children take over but they don’t just ditch their parents they respect and care for them in their old age.
But one thing about your model. You had to contribute the million upfront. Who pays you back for being the bank? This I don’t like. There would be a need for cooperative incubators and friendly credit unions etc and those exist. But they still serve more corporatized cooperatives and apparently some even taking on unions! Something is wrong there even though unions represent a model with membership where there is no ownership.