Ok so its difficult to make any claims about what the ideal amount is that voters should be charged in order to get the best outcomes. I have no idea what the right amount is. Maybe the 1 nxt tx fee is perfect, maybe its more than it ought to be, maybe its less than it ought to be. Inorder to find out that would require some sort of market discovery process which would be difficult if not imposable in this context. The point is just that when voting entails no cost people tend to vote based on aesthetic considerations. When voting entails a cost than they tend to be less likely to vote based on aesthetic considerations and more likely to vote based on conviction. Of course there is no guarantee that they will be right just because they have conviction. But there is a strong correlation between conviction and having done atleast SOME amount of research on the topic.
This lecture deals with some of these topics and is very well worth an hour of anyone life who isnt already familiar with these arguments. It very well may be one of the most important videos you ever watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCSfaWF2bAPsychologically, even the smallest amount is far more than ZERO.
It is like a threshold to be overstepped.
yea i tend to think that the fee should be pretty low. If its too high than you open it up to more possibility for manipulation by rent seekers. so imagine that we are voting on whether nxt in the community fund should be spent on marketing. if the fee is really high than we would have low participation it could make it profitable for those who would be on the receiving end of this contract to spend less on buying these votes than they would receive in the payout.
1 nxt is probably higher than is actually desirable if you do not take into consideration the costs of blockchain bloat.