just saying one particular exchange at this point in time isn't fully exploiting its potential position doesn't say at all that exchanges can't exploit this, and sooner or later they will.
Why are you referring to this non-issue as an exploit when the decision to transfer (and/or store) their property to the exchanges is made solely by the XEM holders themselves?
well it is an issue, as non dumping types who support the network are disadvantaged.
often those sending to the exchanges aren't usually caring about the best interest of the network.
also with any crypto points of centralisation such as exchanges aren't in the balance of things a positive thing for currencies attempting to be truly p2p (though i can understand the benefits for the crypto community in its infancy).
you can not seriously call an exploit where a non holder can hold coins stake them and increase network participation based on other holders coin a non issue. especially when on the most part people gave them the coins to sell rather then to use for their own gain.
no exchange should be staking coins, thats a given in the crypto community, its bad for any POS coin.
tbh there is no point in the whole NEM equation if you want to pick and chose what is fair network participation, it defeats the main point of having a hard coded mathematical equation as the backbone of trust in a network.
(i must give NEM credit though you did solve a password software exploit, present in similar systems that I won't go into here, that's a pleasant surprise i have to admit, and shows there was some competence in atleast one of the devs).
