Sort:  

"Are there other high value DPoS chains using 1t1v?"

I dunno. I only care about Steem.

While you're right in your next statement, that's about the kind of commitment we have been hearing from Roy Liu regarding powering down the exchanges and withdrawing Tron's puppet witnesses.

Do please differentiate yourself from Roy. I'd like your forthright consideration, not lawyerspeak.

Saying, "I don't know" but advocating for an untested change to be implemented doesn't work. 1t1v may actually be ideal, but until things are really thought through and tested, it could end up being a bad change and the witnesses would again be blamed for moving too quickly or going with changes that haven't been shown to be successful elsewhere.

Maybe EOS will go to 1t1v before Steem, and we'll learn a lot from them. I don't know.

You are the parties, you witnesses, we Steemers have elected to understand and effect necessary governance of the chain.

Please assess the facts and take a position based on your understanding - and not whatever some other chain I have no interest in or governance of does or doesn't do - so that Steem can proceed to deal with novel circumstances that aren't replicated elsewhere.

The math is simple. Make a decision and take a stand, which is what Steem needs from it's governance now. Failing to do this will result in delivery of the chain to it's extant majority stakeholder, as has been made clear. Even implementing 1t1v is not proposed to prevent that stake advantage. All it does make possible is accurately weighting the stake of voters per their holdings. Sun's stake is magnified 30x by 1t30v, and that's the present circumstance.

I think that before pushing for an solution we must examine the problem using a solid game theory model. Else we riak introducing other attack vectors. EDIT: having stake does not equal knowing what is the best solution.

"having stake does not equal knowing what is the best solution."

No, but it sure equals the power to ram your favored solution/problem through. Pretty sure that's what @lukestoke's reply meant.

Find a better approach to governance that DPoS stake-weighted voting and it can be seriously explored. I have yet to see one that doesn't have much more serious problems (like China's centrally controlled reputation system). Read Skin in the Game for a deeper understanding for what stake-weight does have some value (but I agree, is far from perfect, especially for those who have skin in the game in other formats outside of token holdings).

Availed of the same grasp of alternate political mechanisms as you discuess, I do not propose any of them. All I am proposing is the equalization of stake undertaking governance of Steem, by eliminating the 30x multiplication of the weight of substantial stake - such as held by Tron now - over governance.

Accurately weighting our skin in the game is all I presently advocate, not replacing it with some other mechanism. It's a simple thing, and confounds potential abusers of the extant system, such as we are demonstrably and existentially threatened by today as a currency and society.