Now I see your point, but I think that instead of forging with the big accounts, let others, with smaller Nxt stakes forge, and better donate couple of hunders k for bounties that will really help Nxt to succeed. Like bybitcoin is doing it.
But who should I donate my couple of hundred k too? I know that sometimes the smartest guy in the room says the least, and the loudest guy is actually full of shit. Why don't we try and setup a group consensus first to co-ordinate things a little. I want a decentralised NXT, but in this critical phase why not try and have a loose structure to maximise the bang for our NXT buck. I know I'm not the guy to decide who should get some community funding, so I want to donate through a consensus of people who have shown they are smart and capable. I saw the list of people posting in this thread. I vote for quality, not quantity. Who are the really smart people with good ideas? They decide where my NXT goes.
here are some thoughts about a concept call "mining hubs" to accumulate accounts for forging without the need to transfer the stake to one account.
its not a complete worked out concept and just a idea need to prove with some developers if its possible to implement.
there were already a few words:
Would it ever be possible to make pools of some kind with Nxt?
Why not? Same basis: transactions.
just a comment to this interesting topic:
as we know, members of these fond need to trust one person who manage the forging-account.
charming would be to have "forging-hub's" where stake holders can connect their accounts.
the earned fees would distributed proportional to the account balance.
the hub manager keep a fee - for sure ;-)
I could imagine that concept would join more people as the single account-concept.
an nice side effect would be that the periodic distribution of all fees would generate new fees...
this sustains the whole system.