I see myself as a backend developer. Dabbling in frontends is fun for a while but I would never want to get stuck there. Frontends arguably require a lot more work-hours to complete than the base layer, especially if we are talking about something like gaming (heavy graphics frontends).
Possible Solution?
I'd like to employ a decentralized business model that incentivizes the community to build the frontends for me so I don't have to worry about it. Inflation is generated and given to the best content, the best content makes it into the more popular versions of the game. Everything is open source so anything that's popular enough will get forked quite a bit.
How do we stop the best content from being so subjective?
We wouldn't want garbage content to enter the game just because there was a bunch of circle-jerking going on, right? The thing about proof-of-burn governance is that everything is a burn. Money talks and bullshit walks. Burn money to start a vote and it gets shut down? You just wasted $50, friend! Oops.
That's the goal, anyway...
My first iteration of this mechanic is going to be a referral code for card creation. When a card is created on a given frontend, that frontend will list themselves for the referral code, 10% of the inflation generated via card creation goes to the referred.
Ignore referral policing
I thought a lot about how to prevent people from gaming the system and setting themselves as the referral, but in the end that kind of negative-reinforcement won't do. Instead, the frontends need to be good enough to coax users into their frontends over other options (or at least set them as the code).
Hive accounts would have reputations with the various frontends. Say account @edicted spent $100 on cards on such-and-such frontend, this data would be saved and evaluated across a point system (likely some low grade reputation algorithm). There can be leaderboards and even account suspensions. Too bad so sad: time to use a different frontend or resolve the problem.
This is all end game type stuff, but the idea is that I make a shitty frontend that looks like hot garbage and then offer the community to compete with me for profit (all software open source).
All software not open-source.
Obviously the people making frontends are perceived competitors, so we would expect the bigger frontends to keep code to themselves, but the base layer and toolkit should be available to everyone.
Bounties to develop and open-source code.
The way I see it going down is that there's a lot of work to be done and a lot of work that is still closed source for profit reasons. I imagine networks will start buying out code and open sourcing it once they get more adoption and this space grows.
This is why the Hive dev fund is important. Not because it's amazing now but funding development will be a part of any system that succeeds in the extreme long-term. Yeah, there are a lot of problems with it, but we are also a lot farther ahead than networks that don't have these mechanics at all.
Conclusion
Incomprehensible stream of conscience achievement award.
Frontend referral codes could be an important piece of decentralizing development and ownership of these budding networks. There are many ways to attempt to go about these things, and we find ourselves still in the fledgling early stages.