I can imagine a situation where people donating about 100 VRC are holding as strong of a vote as someone who donated 100,000. You could get trolls coming out of no-where, getting together, and throwing 100 VRC each to swing votes in a direction that may not represent the community properly. I think weighted votes are the only way to do it.
Something like:
100VRC-1000VRC donated = 1 vote
1001VRC-10,000VRC = 2 votes
10,001VRC-30,000VRC = 2.5 votes
30,001VRC-50,000VRC = 3 votes
Just an example.. I'm sure it could be structured fairly, albeit I'm not the best to go for advice on this but it seems like a fair method to me...
I have to agree. No matter what we think things are not equal. If someone has a lot more money invested then be they should have more say because they have much more than me to loose. Same with people with less then me. If I am top dog I sure as hell do not want someone that has .0001% of what I have invested running how my money is handled.
Obviously, the vote of how to spend the donations should be by those who go now and donate with each coin being 1 vote. Anything else is wholly unfair.
100 VRC donated = 100 votes
50,000 VRC donated = 50,000 votes.
That is what weighted means and that is why I believe James choose the word "weighted" when he first donated the coins back to the community. Very simple and fair.