Would you agree?
- With competitive tx fees: Gets centralized with those that have a big stake. More centralized than DPOS in the end (if pay back delegates do not flourish).
- [crossed out] If not delegation is not an option, which is assumed here in order to analyze the two different types of systems, a lot of stake (!) has to be online which is pretty insecure. Is that still correct or can you lease (with NXT) to yourself? <- based on this https://nxtforum.org/general-discussion/nxt-pos-vs-bitshares-dpos/msg70367/#msg70367
I would cross out this disadvantage. Further verification would be good though.
- Delegates do not have the same interest in the success of the system as when shareholders = forgers.
- An attacker could put up 52 delegates and let them gain the trust of shareholders over a long time and then perform one big attack after which he would be out. This would be cheaper than buying 51 % of the stake but maybe not possible at all.
Further pros and cons?
Higher tx volume and scales better is not an argument because the few forgers with non delegated POS could also have expensive, reliable forging servers and with transparent forging it is known in advance who produces the next block like with DPOS.