a. Corps need to find people
b. People want to be found
So, we make a list. People want to be on the list because of a and b. Now there is incentivize to be on this list. Who manages the list? Well, if it is a person or group of people, they have direct control over discovery of these architects. If it is the entire REA, then the ring is no longer permissionless as we are gatekeeping. If there is no gatekeeper, then there is no list, it is just a participation badge (which is fine!)
You can get into something fancy with TCRs, but they haven’t really been proven widely in practice and it’s still a gatekeeper functionality at the end of the day, albeit a more incentive-aligned one. It is also a massive distraction, you are constantly worried about your position on the list as it directly affects your ability to get work. You could argue brand building is the same thing, but it makes the implicit explicit.
Good architects will be “financially self-sufficient” by being good architects. Participating in the REA and sharing your knowledge on how you can be most efficient and solve problems for corp clients is a sign of being a good Ethereum architect, because it’s a sign that you believe radical colloboration (not competition) gets work done faster and better. Your resume and the work you’ve done in the past fills in the rest of blanks.
A list either devolves meaninglessness (badges), or is a gatekeeping function that prevents others from realizing their own abilities and turns all of it into a competitive game instead of a cooperative one.
I don’t want to build REA as that system. You can feel free to, but I’d like to keep the ring permissionless and colloborative so we can all grow, do well, and help others.