So... if the membership agrees with your "bugs" then they'll get fixed.
hehe, the only caveat is that, to be a member, you already have to:
- Don't care about your privacy and anonymity that much, since you'll have to identify yourslf
- Don't care about supporting an organization whose name is a lie in itself and will likely mislead people - with the high probability of this being intentional.
So, basically, those who are concerned about such "bugs" will probably never become a member. All they can do is to lament that so many people don't give a damn about it, including people important to Bitcoin like you.
Finally, this other reply of mine also applies here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=113400.msg1225189#msg1225189Identities/voting: Please see "Sybil Attack" for why we're requiring names, mailing addresses and emails. If you've got a magical way of identifying anonymous people please send me the source code, I could use it for the Bitcoin Faucet.
Pardon my ignorance, but how can somebody "sybil attack" it? I don't get it. Are GLBSE assets vulnerable to "sybil attack" because people can be anonymous shareholders?
If your concern is "an evil person" buying up the majority of votes and deciding everything, then please keep in mind:
- Bitcoin mining itself faces the same "risk", with a much greater impact in case it happens.
- Influent people like you could always start a new organization if somebody you don't like grabs control of this one. People would likely follow you as they're doing right now.
- At the very extreme, the bylaws could state that anonymous members as a whole don't get to have more than 49% of the votes, for example. I find this unnecessary, but it might tranquilize "unsecured" people.
[/list]