Often an applicant they turn down will get funding elsewhere and experience notable success or failure.
The problem is, this generally isn’t the case. If a proposal passes, then your standing on the board is guerenteed to change, whereas if a proposal fails, then standings will only be adjusted if some other group decides to implement a similar measure. Humans are notoriously risk-averse, and we tend to fear losing things that we already have more than we value gaining new things. Consequently, I’d be concerned that such a set up might incentivise voting down unorthodox proposals that other organizations are unlikely to implement. If it such a proposal passes, then you are will definitely either gain or loose standing, whereas if it’s rejected, your standing will likely remain unchanged.
The problem is, this generally isn’t the case. If a proposal passes, then your standing on the board is guerenteed to change, whereas if a proposal fails, then standings will only be adjusted if some other group decides to implement a similar measure. Humans are notoriously risk-averse, and we tend to fear losing things that we already have more than we value gaining new things. Consequently, I’d be concerned that such a set up might incentivise voting down unorthodox proposals that other organizations are unlikely to implement. If it such a proposal passes, then you are will definitely either gain or loose standing, whereas if it’s rejected, your standing will likely remain unchanged.