In many places there is a minimum age requirement to vote. What if voting stake was based on coin days? Those that care about bts for the long term will get their vote and voice amplified. Those that want to make a quick buck will have less sway on decisions.
That seems to make a lot of sense if there is a practical way to accomplish it.
I agree with BCL, this is an interesting idea. Voting strength is based on stake and amplified based on coin days which are based on? Refresh my memory, I thought it was stake used over a finite time period?
<Off Topic> So I tried to use the forum search to find a definition of "coin days" but as usual lots of mentions but time consuming to weed thru them to discover an answer. This gives me an idea to create a "BitShares Glossary" where terminology like this can have a definition. Ideally this would be a sticky post at the top of the "General Discussion" board. I'll see if I can make that happen and start working on it, but it won't happen this week.
<On Topic>
If this were implemented as an extension to abit's implementation of free transactions the impact on existing code would be minimized. In practice it would amount to changing the vote processing code to factor in a new committee parameter ("voteMagnify") that adds more votes. I don't think proxies are really impacted. They should be voting with the aggregate of the voting power of the each account the proxy represents, whatever that is.
As I think about this I can well imagine it might be tricky to get right, recalling BM saying how "expensive" it is to process votes, which is why it is only done once per maintenance window as opposed to each witness cycle as it was in version 0.9.x.
However, if this were done it would be an ideal time to think about how some sort of certification / audit / report could be done to add credibility to our voting algorithm.