As we communicated to Entropy privately, we are not satisfied with replies in public or private, and do not support Austin’s inclusion on this committee in light of the inconsistencies and inability to provide either documentation or a human being to serve as a reference.
That said, while we are likely to vote against as a result, we do not plan to actively campaign against this proposal. We support the concept, even if we do not support all of the choices.
More broadly, GFX usually votes against proposals that bundle creation of an office and ratification of specific persons to hold that office. See here, here, and here for recent examples; and we generally want to maintain consistency (though we will continue to evaluate on a case-by-case basis for mitigating factors).
This is an excellent example of why the DAO should generally not bundle approval of an initiative with selection of the service provider – there is no easy way to unbundle opposition to a service provider and support for a proposal.