One question to you guys. If we now have your system and a group with 20% of all LISK. These guys can now split the 20% LISK between 20 accounts and vote 20 delegates into the top 101, which will stay there forever.
Where is my thinking error? The current system would be much better, because it could prevent it. Your system couldn't do anything.
Yes you are right, but the cost would be 20% of Lisk to grab 20 spots, instead of 1% to grab 20 spots
Please see my post above. It seems you don't understand our current system. With 1% you will never grab any seat at Lisk. Not if you are on your own and alone to vote for yourself.
How is anyone going to get votes? What's in it for the voters? Is this a popularity contest?
Voters are going to vote to get something out of it. So then they all join a pool (who might steal a little weight from each one). Then how will this be decentralized?
This whole system is a recipe for centralization at every turn. First you exclude entire countries by imposing unreasonable liabilities on signatories, then you must join a pool to make it worth your time to vote and even then there is no guarantee that you will get representation for your vote.
In the end, people will vote for Donald Trump because he is a well funded showman, and Chase bank because they have the lawyers to combat the agencies.
You have completely ignored the exposure of signatories to liability by making them reveal their identities.