The idea here, since we don't want to make it a competition or something where only one wins the jackpot, that if a lazy dev takes the job, and he's behind schedule, or provides a low quality deliverance, then the client can unassign. I here your concerns but I hope it won't grow into a backdoor for stealing code.
Not entirely fair. A lot of good things have worked on the honor system, as long as fair thought has gone into the "rules" of the system so that enough easy, edge case abuse scenarios are protected against. A big one that comes to my mind was the gaming league, CAL, back in the day. It was 100% honor system based, with a target audience that was known to be hackers, liars, and in general kids - yet it worked!
So (effectual or not) attempts to protect consumers from developers not delivering. What symmetric mechanisms do you have in mind to protect developers? How are you handling copyright assignment, which should really wait until payment has cleared?
