Does "fund" have any value? Or does the amount of fund just show that you are voting for some of the delegates in the fund group?
See this https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=5775.msg77810#msg77810
The happyshares concept would be harmful to any DPOS network if it is applied at scale.
I think the people who vote base on a small bribe does not have enough asset to control the system.
Rich guys who have much voting power will not accept a small bribe.
so,you get my point.after all ,DPOS voting power is not about head count,it's about the amount of the asset.
You are completely right with what you said! I would only be worried if a "voting culture" is established where shareholders do not vote anymore for the best delegates but instead for the biggest pay back.
Like you said there would be little benefit for big stakeholders to vote for delegates who are not the best for the job but give high pay backs. 2 Questions / issues arise here:
1) There is no difference between small and big shareholders here (with small shareholders the pack back is small compared to the effect they have on the delegates approval).
2) If such pay back culture is establish and wide spread once big shareholders might just do the same without thinking much about it because they might not completely comprehend that the benefit/cost ratio is negative here.
One question I have: Do you get "fund" proportional to the amount of stake you voted with or x amount of fund if you vote at all vote a delegate. The last option would be beneficial to the system because it would encourage voting at all...