The following edit has been added:
"A valid concern raised by @udow is the potential for individuals to unstake and cast votes across multiple accounts using the same amount of SPS, effectively reducing the fee to 5% or 288k SPS according to the calculation above. While I remain optimistic that this will not evolve into a significant issue, given the rarity of such close calls, even if such instances arise, I truly doubt anyone would be willing to spend such a substantial portion of their personal wealth to influence a vote. I will also consult with Matt to explore potential technical measures that could be implemented to mitigate this risk. One example could involve automatically "powering down" the votes of individuals who choose to early withdraw, thereby addressing this potential loophole"
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
This can be a significant issue. This can be a potential exploit please edit the proposal to include a fix while talking to Matt otherwise this doesn't work
The potential fix I will speak to Matt about is simply ensuring when a user instant withdraws, it also "powers down" their votes, similar to how you can "power up" if you stake more. This means this exploit will no longer work.
If you unstake currently you do not "power down" as you cannot make it liquid before a vote ends anyway, so the normal unstake function does not need to change.