I guess you actually mean “Treasury funded nodes” That would make a lot more sense.
It is possible under the treasury model and actually sounds kinda cool. Basically anyone may submit a proposal to receive funding in return for running a node or multiple nodes. The only problem that arises - is transparency and sustainability.
When you have privately funded nodes (pools) - those may be “fired” at any time if delegates decide that this pool does not provide enough transparency, or if it acts weird.
But with a publicly funded nodes (from treasury) you immediately find multiple complications:
- How funding will be sustained and mitigated? (Might be solved with a smart-contract)
- How a node will prove accountability?
The latter is a more complex problem, since even if you find ways for a node to demonstrate it’s active honest participation (system monitoring tools, regular audits, published accounting, etc) - there has to be a way to “fire” that node in the future. And that means - there has to be a set of people responsible for making this decision.
There might be some naive solutions immediately found - like, for example, the smart contract could mention a set of “publicly elected” people that are selected to oversight such node[s] (but you immediately need to remember that people are subjects for corruption), or there may be a function put in place that would allow to run another public vote round that would take away the funding from a node (but you need to remember that any public vote on a treasury would prolly take at least months to be executed, so its use as an emergency solution is highly questionable).
So, in conclusion - the idea is cool, and it is possible\implementable in some ways, although there are still complications to account for