But it's not win-win-win when somebody can propose something that exclusively enriches a certain few people
Out of interest, do you have a particular proposal in mind ?
Here's the list.
https://www.dashcentral.org/budget/completedIt doesn't matter whether it is happening now with the current proposals, just the fact that it is theoretically possible makes it a problem.
ts a tough one though, because the higher the threshold is the more likely that voter apathy will become fatal. I think there would need to be a penalty for masternodes who don't vote on some minimum threshold number of proposals.
We have had this discussion about a million times, and the reality is that the way we have it now is probably ideal. You can't punish people for not voting, that's undemocratic. The addition of the abstain option in 12.1 helps some with this, but really, if I don't care one way or another about a proposal I am not gonna open my wallet to vote abstain, when I could just not vote. Even if I think a proposal is the greatest thing ever, if it's obviously going to pass with an overwhelming YES - No ratio, why would I vote? If you are holding on to $20k USD worth of an asset, you better damn well get to decide if you want to vote or not along with how you vote.
I DO vote on things that I feel strongly about and look like the vote may be close. But that's my choice, no one else's.
The problem you are trying to fix doesn't exist. If someone put in this "theoretical proposal" that obviously only benefited themselves, my previous abstention from voting does not remove my ability to vote NO on future proposals. I read all the proposals, and I think other MN do as well for the most part. Just because my vote isn't in the final count of most previous proposal results has no bearing on future vote participation.