Time to speak (these replies are on my own and I’m not speaking on behalf of Leagues)
I’m against this proposal: as a person who is used to working in teams and seeing products grow, this is a nonsensical proposal, without clear goals, and given mainly by regressed frustration because of the price of the token.
If you wanted contributors ready to shill the project for the sole purpose of seeing a token price go up, then you voted wrong (at least I speak for myself).
TVL, as in the rest of the protocols during this bear market, has dropped dramatically, we are not the only ones. I’m writing this not as an excuse, this is to properly contextualize events.
Confusing proposal: what are the real outcomes?
@unicorn What is the goal here with this post?
Reduce expenses during hard times as centralized companies do in the crypto space?
Suggest different approaches in organization and ways of working for contributors?
Rather than a proposal, it seems to me to be a mix of venting and suggestions, which is unclear to me as a final voting purpose.
By the way, these two sentences sound like:
- You’ve created Idle DAO from scratch now;
- Until now the Leagues didn’t work on anything.
…Seriously? 
In general, a person should be incredibly enthusiastic about continuing to grow the DAO always, not at the time when is doing a proposal (which is to remove small groups of active contributors who have contributed to the various activities of the Idle ecosystem to date).
For example, none from the community (except @AllinCrypto) gave feedback or suggestions about the Governance Mining proposal (p.s. I’m still awaiting a reply from you here). If you were so enthusiastic about being an active DAO member as you are saying in this post, you would have left suggestions and reasoned opinions on the proposal, no?
Have you ever heard of low bandwidth right? Because what you’re saying, in the current state of the protocol, with the products offered and the partners to handle that joined the Idle DAO ecosystem, is a bit weird thinking that only 3 people can handle all this work.
Suggestions on the current models, rationale with (real) outcomes
Now, finishing with personal responses (of which I am not a fan but in fairness about some things you have to respond to), I would like you to somehow, as DAO members generally do, suggest changes to be made to the current Leagues model.
Because you should be aware that, proposing to eliminate the subDAOs and start over with the team that originally was there before the Leagues, means having delays in the coming months on many activities, a greater heavy load than the current one towards these people (@Coinballers if you wanted some feedbacks, here’s my first thought on that).
DAO Members activity
I would also like to know if you have a plan for the active participation of DAO members: what strategy do you have in mind following this “proposal”? Because a DAO without participation is very complex to scale in the long term.
By eliminating the Leagues will you (the DAO members that actively commented during these 3 days) be active in chatting, discussing, suggesting ideas, and voting proposals? If yes, well this really doesn’t have a meaningful correlation 