The success of any governance model is entirely dependent on bitcoin blase it is measured against. Informal governance does not always give a strong sense of stability. Open source projects often produce vaporware.
Open source projects often end up scratching their own itch. One common tendency of projects lead by a consensus of highly technical people is that they often focus in on technical problems instead of consumer problems. The Swarm Fund model, for example, is an incentivized consortium model. What is unique about blockchain in these hybrid solutions is they allow for legal and regulatory compliance to be built into the system, something that is basically impossible on the pure public blockchain model. It is likely decentralized governance solutions will work only when they provide a 10x advantage over what is currently available. Additionally, although I have never wavered in my support of ambitious projects like Ethereum, I do not wish for key figures in the community like Vitalik to ever have to put themselves at risk over the decisions of whether or not to censor some project.
I would much prefer to see these projects organically evolve beyond their founders and create a stable platform for decision-making that does not have the risks of informal governance. Perhaps Christmas is also making me notice my newly white hair. In my early 20s I was an unmitigated a fan of technology for its own sake, including projects like Google Wave. Now that I have grey hairs I increasingly focus on things that have clear utility to some end user and a governance structure that is complementary to delivering that utility.