Hi @furiousanger principally I am not worried about the impact of the voting power if there are parties that want to present more tokens they are free to. I would also point out that the Mocaverse is not the largest delegate if you see https://delegate.apecoin.com/ there are two other wallets that have approx. the same range of tokens as mocaverse
I would also want to clearly point out that Mocaverse is also decentralized and I do not agree that Mocaverse holders always vote in the interest of Animoca, the voting history clearly suggests otherwise when you look at the complete history as supposed to pick and choose certain events that suit a particular agenda-based and biased narrative. This is something that others have pointed out before.
I am more concerned around the principle of who gets to vote if it is not “one token one vote” which I can agree may be overly simplistic but is also an easily understood principle.
By offering other users the ability to vote with more power without having to pay for it you are not only reducing Mocaverses influence but every other token holder who paid for their token which is the vast majority of holders of apecoin today. This is the bigger issueI think we need to address.
The circulating supply of apecoin is about 20x the actual tokens used to vote at this moment in time. I would aim to try to bring more people who are not voting their tokens today and bring them in to vote and either grow existing delegates or create new ones.
I think an underlying principle should be discussed and agreed on because if you can create a new token pool from the DAO that is community governed with your particular rule set what stops someone else from proposing a similar idea to have a similar number of tokens with a slightly different rule set and why would anyone want to purchase tokens when they can ask the DAO for “free” voting tokens in the future to address one perceived balance or another?
That would be my initial reaction and I do think it is sensible to give it some more deeper thought of course. I understand and appreciate the sentiment I just think it needs to be thought out more thoroughly where a rule can be more universally applied.
Best,
Yat