My interpretaption here is that StakeGeek is effectively buying votes and voting however it wants with the community’s voting power (but don’t worry because it votes 100% of the time, no matter what, because that’s all anyone needs to be concerned about…? 
). Please help me see how this is a good thing from the point of view of governance decentralisation.
After the beta phase and transition to DAO, the voting mechanism can be adjusted and is subject to DAO decisions
It sounds like StakeGeek considers this to be a mere implementation detail. But in my opinion getting this aspect right is pivotal to determining whether this project is actually good for the long term health of the network (given the governance implications).
Following One or Multiple Neurons
But who would decide which neurons and how would this be updated? (Not all DAOs are created equal - please keep reading)
Each Token Holder Voting Pass-Through
If I understand correctly you’re suggesting allowing the individuals who have no long-term stake in the network to make important governance decisions. Do you not see an issue that these individuals would not be bound to the outcome of their vote (as their stake is liquid and they can leave at any time)?
“Neutral” Voting
This is the only remotely palatable option in my opinion (all the other alternatives presented appear to suffer the problems described above). Nevertheless this is a bit of a cop out. It’s not counter productive, but it doesn’t really sound productive either (it doesn’t advance the state of ICP governance in any way as far as I can tell).
I’m asking for clarity on these aspects because I think they’re vitally important to get right. I asked the same sorts of questions to the WaterNeuron team, who had already thought all of these issues through and appear to have a very well considered solution - solving the liquidity problem without upending the state of governance (more likely than not I believe their liquid staking solution will improve the state of ICP governance).
Full disclosure: I’ve invested in WaterNeuron. My intentions with this post are simply to get clarity on a topic that I think requires close attention and scrutiny (governance, and how it’s managed)