I do not think that your premise for the proposal is proven. It may be correct (or not) but we need data and not take this decision lightly. Since my response is getting too long I decided instead to write a post about it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I agree with the exchange risk, I think 4 weeks will deter them enough. We can also blacklist exchange accounts from voting as part of steem chain policy. We can't prove whether 4 weeks will stimulate investment, it is a hypothesis, only by testing and experimenting can we prove or disprove the hypothesis and adjust accordingly. 4 weeks is a good starting point.
Who would maintain such a blacklist? Are you seriously suggesting that blacklisting votes for witnesses in DPOS is acceptable policy?
it is acceptable if it is exchanges imo, who hold user's funds and using them to vote without express permission. blacklist could be witness updated via softfork or something, preferrably consensus based.
Active witnesses deciding who can't vote for witnesses, what could possibly go wrong???
Point taken, some other general community consensus then like the steemproposals.
We wouldn't be able to blacklist exchanges as easily as you think, especially if they dug in their heals and voted for their own witnesses using the stakes of their depositors.