You're doing this at the price of completely alienating non investors. Why do this when you can have both?
You can "easily" adjust the governance model so those that stake for longer have more say. You can even adjust the reward system to encourage it.

There is simply nothing that justifies the 3 month powerdown time that cannot be replaced with a smarter system.
I feel that all it stems from is fear that people will sell and that's the stupidest position to take.

Does "Discourage" mean "Prevent", because I'm certain that you think that's what it means. You also think that somehow transactions were made that exchanges had no fucking all idea what they were making or their consequences, because "they don't give a fuck about this norank chain". Yeah, SOUND POSITION to take, Genius, who can argue with your reasoning after all #Proofof_norankchain.
|Yeah it's completely STUPID, |retarded even, |to be CONCERNED about dumping.
|In fact, why be concerned at all about such trivialies, |have you not heard about the hashtag
^beatdrop

If you have a Solid Chain you need not Fear Dumping. SOLID CHAIN provides, in Solid Chain we Abide.

No, but really, why do you think that being concerned about dumping and trying to prevent it is the pinnacle of stupid positions?

Solid Chain me bro with Investors.