Also, I'm sure that the masternode opperators will vote on things that benefit them the most to increase their holdings...
And then masternode operators would be left with worthless coins in their possession pissing off everybody (miners, investors etc).
Do you even understand what are you writting or are you just having fun?
Masternode owners will only vote for what's good for Dash because they're long term holders and want their investment to increase. How can they do that? By growing Dash.
Example, Greedy MN owners want to take more of the block reward for themselves so they vote to increase their share to 80/10/10 allowing all the miners to leave. Now the security of the hash has been compromised, compromising the system, users leave in droves and the whole network collapses.
And it wouldn't take long either.
You can see, every decision will and has been weighed heavily against what is best for the project BECAUSE they're so heavily invested in the project.
The main point here is that there is nothing that the Masternodes can vote on where their interests are not aligned with the Dash Project.
LOL, just fucking lol! So the Bitcoin block reward debate has taught you that everyone knows what is best for the network and will only vote for what is good for the network? Point being that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
But my larger point is that the system is set-up to continually reward a bunch of fatcats who do nothing but collect tax/fees/freedom-points on the backs of the dash poor who have little to no say in what they pay in fees, which if I have my say, will kill dash and shortly. So not exactly in your best interest to be claiming to be decentralized, when in fact you aren't, but you're still doing it despite the risk, so weird and contrary to your benevolent oligarch argument.
But look around, who do you see, a bunch of greedy snake-oil salesmen hoping (with little regard to reality) that no one notices the flaw of only idiots would pay you extra for centralized services that other coins do better and almost free. Your selling hype, the reality is there is no decentralization without a trustless way to verify that it is trustless, so your left pitching the illusion of decentralization, the illusion that a system that doesn't employ end-to-end privacy is good enough, the illusion that 11 algos are better than one, the illusion of a fair governance, the illusion that Evan is a genius, and the illusion that if you pitch it to the whole world and everyone would just leave you alone that the average joe is going to pass up the same illusions from a trusted bank or credit company with the backing of their local government and jump on board with a coin with a dubious past, a technology they probably don't understand and laundry detergent as a name.
I'll give you props for selling yourself the dream.