Let stick to 1 NXT = 1 VOTE. That is the simpler approach and it seem fair to begin with.
Let's not. Let's try and find a solution, instead of just giving up.
1 NXT = 1 VOTE is the cleanest soluation. Not sure why people doubt that. All other approaches with account caps (e.g. one account can have a maximum of x votes) can be manipulated by creating mulitple accounts. And the more complicated it gets, the more are people discouraged to vote in the first place.
And of course small account holders will criticize this approach and thats totally natural, but i have a only a few nxt too and still think that people who invested in the project in the first place should have a bigger saying.
It's not so obvious solution.
There are at least three known ways to vote:
1. every individual has 1 vote (analogy to NXTsystem: 1 account = 1 vote)
2. every share has 1 vote ( 1 NXT = 1 vote)
3. every "skill" has x votes ( don't know how to implement in NXTsystem )
The example for the 3rd one is from groups, where skilled people, experts had
more weight in their votes than others.
In global NXTsystem is no persons, no trusted persons, therefore no skilled persons either.
Just NXTs and accounts. Unless there will be built a method to give identifications
to accounts (...which cannot be gamed:).
Which one is better? The 1st or the 2nd?
The 2nd is suitable for economical issues, which concerns the owned wealth.
E.g. companies' general meetings, where is decided company's future plans:
the people who own more shares, they own bigger part of the company, and so they
have more votes.
But is NXTsystem a company, which can be owned?
The 1st is suitable for non-economical issues.
In NXTsystem it has the problem of "splitted accounts".
How splitted accounts could be rejected or at least made more uncomfortable?
- require forging
- require at least 1 NXT in account (then splitting would cause some costs)
- ...
