I'd rather see voting opened up to anyone who holds DASH. Every vote would be weighted based on the average balance of the voting address over the last 30 days before the voting deadline. This would decentralize voting and help alleviate the elitist perception.
That's fair enough and I would of proposed that if I thought it would work. But the problem is, you're describing a proof of stake system with potential abuse from whales. And there's also the problems of lack of participation and weight. That's why I thought to anchor a small amount of dash to a username, because then a whale would have to register millions of usernames and make appropriate deposits. Not impossible but it would become patently clear what was happening and we could respond accordingly.
What abuse from whales are you concerned about? The whale's vote (like any others) could be weighted by the average balance of their address the previous 30 days before the vote deadline. If they are invested enough to hold that balance, shouldn't they have a voice? And are there many whales who wouldn't be multi-masternode owners anyway?
You could certainly have masternode balances weighted higher based on a reputation score but I wouldn't allow 5x, maybe max 2x as to diminish the perception of centralized power. The idea here is to get more involvement from any and all DASH holders that are willing to get involved and not just masternode owners.
This alone should increase participation.