Quote from: thisisausername on September 20, 2014, 03:00:52 PM

Quote from: Frigga77 on September 20, 2014, 02:18:13 PM

I am sorry to be negative, but that system cannot work. It is very simplistic and fraud will be imminent.
1. I can send multiple tokens (coins?) to my own address, each is one vote, so then I will pay for my own votes and get chosen.
2. A website cannot replace the blockchain, in fact has nothing to do with the blockchain other than that you can represent information from the blockchain on it
3. People can vote multiple times for the same person
4. How do I know who voted? In the GF I guess that other GF holders vote, but not other people, how to prevent that?

I'd imagine sending the token transaction indicates that the sending address votes for the receiving address with its remaining stake, so Sybil attacks nor voting for multiple people are not possible.

I could be wrong.

Edit: Or just slow.

increasing the vote size from 0.001 to 0.1 still conts as a single vote, and multiple votes using the send many function are treated as one vote. most would try to have a script that creates new addresses and sens sya 1 coin to the address then vote with those addresses, this was encountered in the first implementation and was countered by considering what % of the chain is held by voting addresses, this means that even a thousand micro votes will not unbalance the scale since votes from actual holders will counter the effect, essentially, that person will just be losing themselves a ton of coin.

One issue i am aware of is a 51% attack, where in reality if a single person holds more voting power than the rest of the voters then can easily manipulate the system, however , based off information from the snapshot, this is not likely, and any person willing to buy up the required coin to do this would meet the same constraints as trying to 51% PoS.