you dont take topics seriously, you simply want to come up with a random brainfart and hope people bow down and agree that your topic has merit and agree with you.

you dont take the time to think deeply about a topic nor run scenarios, you instead hope people agree with you and have them explain to you why things will work, you hate the idea that people disagree with you, yet serious discussions do actually involve different responses that may not agree with your stance.

this being a serious discussion category doesnt mean i have to be boyscout, ass kissing, agreeable. it means we should actually think deeper than a brain fart and actually discuss things at a deeper level using research and thought. something you lack and thus needs pointing out

..
so again yes if everyone is given 1000 power unit means everyone has 1000 power units..
but.. unless you have a protocol rule that only limits one power unit per election, there will be abuses of use. as said multiple times if people can ignore certain elections and then use multiple units on one specific election, it can sway a election in favour of certain representative or proposal that may got against the overall community preference.

have you even thought of a way to prevent one individual collecting 1m vote power??
have you even thought of a way to prevent one individual with 1m vote power then using it on one candidate??

also as suggested in multiple other threads about voting..  better voting systems dont need to be currency unit/power unit based.. it can simply be proof of signature based so its a one key one vote based

all other threads about blockchain voting concepts only want to do a currency unit concept offering multiple units to be spread aimlessly over as many or as little elections.. are purely promoted as such to then have a secondary market to sell the units.. which then defeats the security, fairness and responsibility of elections. thus defeats its purpose of being a voting system and just becomes a crapcoin on some secondary market