Please, read carefully my first post. I guess the next situation:
1. Contactor may have 51% of DAO tokens.
2. He say: we must invest 100% DAO to organization such as "horns and hooves" for example.
3. Remaining 49% investors believe that the firm "horns and hooves" will be reliable and profitable and agree with the 51% which owned by contractor.
4. Contractor takes 100% collected money to his wallet and say goodbye to all.
Means what if contractor will have 51% DAO and remaining 49% of DAO investors believe him.
And they do not plan to split. And after the decision, in which all believe, nothing prevents the owner of 51% DAO pick up all the money.
Now we have, that no one knows, who has how many% DAO. And everyone who has invested in DAO now, believe that Slock.it is a robust project.
Therefore, the arguments voiced by devs about the protection of 51% attack are not reliable.
There is no guarantee that thousands of addresses Ethereum with 51% of the DAO will not be one person or one group of people. Even if we will see Ethereum addresses with % of DAO.
Therefore, every contract must allocate money automatically and incrementally. After each stage of the implementation and progress there must be report from contractors and only after what should be allocated a new part of the money, not 100% immediately.
Invested 20% DAO, returned part or all. Received a report from the contractor - the contract is automatically transferred a new part of the investment.