An investment bank may invest in a restaurant; a commercial bank may lend money to the same restaurant. But nobody would expect to find that restaurant within either bank.
And yet, the way the financial and productive systems are enmeshed in these DPOS systems means that we do expect those bankers to at least do some of the washing up!
Finance is not a productive activity - it is fundamentally extractive. The aim is for productivity to outpace the extraction! This cannot happen if both processes are doing the same thing - the post-n-vote thing!
But one is making money from financial capital while the other from social capital. Hence, I think the two processes need to be linked but separated - the twin-pool design.
However, it looks as if the governance algorithms may have moved up a notch in the list of priorities.
And self-voting causes so much blood on the carpet precisely because it highlights the tension between productivity and extraction. Without some KYC, the solution will have to be more imaginative... so we can argue about something else.
I love this idea.
Under these circumstances, one could also introduce a voting system independent of the Stake. If a vote is a vote and the payout comes from a kind of pool in which the vests are first "stored" and then converted to the number of votes actually present, there is really no need to discuss selfvotes any more. Then you have your one vote, but its shares are divided among all producers who also have a vote.
Since I am not a coder and have no idea at all whether my ideas could be programmed even rudimentarily, I have held back with it so far.
Don't hold back - we really need more discussions.
However, please expand.
So... so someone with 10 BP has the same vote as 10,000 BP?