This is a fair assessment and I have updated the blog post to reflect accounts vs. people. I chose to be generous by calling them people because I didn't want to bring up the potential for sybil attacks to skew the apparent decentralization of Nxt. For all intents and purposes an account is a single private key controlled by some individual. Nxt may be more centralized, but not less than the accounts indicate.
It's really hilarious that you imply that NXT is susceptible to Sybil attacks when with NXT you actually have to purchase the currency to stake but with Bitshares you just have to be voted in. If an individual in NXT does own multiple accounts and forges with them, that's not a "Sybil attack". If they own the NXT, they have the right to divide it up into as many accounts as they want and forge with it. Purchasing NXT validates their stakepower. I don't even have to own Bitshares to obtain a delegate position. Your father, Stan, even acknowledges that it is acceptable for an individual to occupy multiple delegate positions. If that's not a "Sybil attack", I don't know what is.
It doesn't matter if you collect delegates' SSNs, driver's licenses, birth certificates and thumbprints, Bitshares' DPoS mechanism will always be susceptible to manipulation. You have introduced a "social construct" (aka voting) which turns Bitshares' delegates into a "government of the wealthy". No one will ever know what type of "behind-the-scenes" politics is going on which results in which delegates are selected.
Because you have instituted this ridiculous charade into chain security, all your figures on "decentralization" and "speed of decentralization" are speculative and assume that all 101 delegates are unique, non-colluding individuals. The fact is all these delegates are not going to compete against each other for a position. Who will become a delegate and control the delegate selection process are the wealthiest stakeholders. This will be accomplished in a quid pro quo manner. This means that really Bitshares is less decentralized than NXT because they will be able to form political/business coalitions which imo will result in them dominating the delegate selection process. The wealthiest stakeholders in Bitshares can do this very easily because it is an "Approval Voting" process. This allows stakeholders to put the
entire weight of their stake behind each and every delegate they approve. The Bitshares' devs will deny this to the very end because they are part of this "ruling elite".