But we already knew DashHoles aren't exactly the brightest stars in the altcoin galaxy. 
Another epic fail by the monero marketing FUD team....
http://blog.oleganza.com/post/144087873288/problem-with-proof-of-stake-and-coin-voting-in
Quote
Problem with Proof of Stake and coin voting in general
The problem with voting by coins is that most coins do not vote. This leaves a small fraction of UTXO to actually vote which is not representative and highly volatile since anyone risking to use idle keys to a large stash of coins can dramatically affect the voting outcome.
Most coins are locked up well under matress with multisig, time locks and possibly even with HSM-controlled keys. Also, pubkeys to long-term stashes do not want to be exposed from under their hashes in order to be better protected against a QC development in the long term.
In other words, most coins that matter, cannot and will not vote.
This leaves only the least important coins to perform voting. Obviously, the result of such voting will be worthless.
The problem with voting by coins is that most coins do not vote. This leaves a small fraction of UTXO to actually vote which is not representative and highly volatile since anyone risking to use idle keys to a large stash of coins can dramatically affect the voting outcome.
Most coins are locked up well under matress with multisig, time locks and possibly even with HSM-controlled keys. Also, pubkeys to long-term stashes do not want to be exposed from under their hashes in order to be better protected against a QC development in the long term.
In other words, most coins that matter, cannot and will not vote.
This leaves only the least important coins to perform voting. Obviously, the result of such voting will be worthless.
off-line masternode voting via trezor solves this problem. next.
...
off-line masternode voting via trezor solves this problem. next.
Coins have nothing to do with voting. Nothing at all.
Coins may stay safely locked down and votes can still be cast.
These potential security concerns have been solved long ago.
Thanks to Evan, Dash is three steps ahead.
#REKT
It doesn't solve the problem of centralization though. The only way you can do that is to openly redistribute the instamined coins and get rid of the aggregation of coins on masternodes--two things that will likely never happen. But I'm sure you'll add more layers of complexity to the problem in a vain attempt to stay a few steps ahead of criticism. But unless you do the two things I outlined, you will miss the core problem of centralization and any "fixes" will be lip stick on a pig.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1443867.msg14601018#msg14601018
EDIT: you could also limit the node aggregation to a very small fee (much tinier than the 10%-50% APR currently) and redistribute the instamined coins and take all power functions away from masternode control--though the odds of these things happening are pretty slim to none as it would require Evan and his buddies owning up to the instamine and relinquishing the benefits.