I disagree, and feel that is the wrong approach. Everyone who cast votes within the past few weeks is obviously still an active stakeholder. Stakeholders are responsible for adjusting their votes accordingly, and I certainly don't feel we should start going down the path of trying to overrule their decisions. It may take some time for some of them to circle back and re-review the witness list, but again - if you take a snapshot of who is there right now and come back in a year, I will bet money that the list will have changed significantly.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It's actually great counterexample to the claim that a lot of less active stakeholders "never" change their votes. When it is important enough, many will (though obviously not the ones who are dead, who lost their keys, etc.). Nearly all arguments about how often stakeholders are supposed to change their votes are being made by someone who doesn't like the decisions stakeholders make (including to be less active, change votes less often, etc.) and is trying to gain an advantage by changing the rules.
Yes, that is 100% correct, your comment here confirms the need to tackle the issue of "dead" voters.
For ALL the right reasons and not for gaming the system.
Plus the fact that user awareness and responsibilities that go with holding stake in a PoS (DPoS) ecosystem need to be promoted in all ways possible. The Alt and blockchain markets are moving at light speed and the changes that come with that require awareness levels and responsibilities that are way above what many can ever fathom.
Again, here is one person who isn't complaining or looking for "an edge" but rather a means to comply with the real needs of our ecosystem.