Do you agree with the Vote Dilution?
<div class="text-justify"><h3>Vote Dilution</h3><ul><li><i>The idea is to divide the value of a witness vote by the amount of voted witnesses.</i></li><ul><li>If you have <code>20 HP</code> and vote for one witness, it's a <code>20 HP</code> for it.</li><li>If you vote for 5 witnesses, it's a <code>4 HP</code> vote for each.</li><li>If you vote for 20 witnesses, each gets a <code>1 HP</code> vote.</li></ul><li>With such mechanism in place, a new takeover attempt would be <i><q>as hard as accumulating 20 times more HP than the whole Hive community</q></i>.</li><ul><li><i>The more witnesses you vote, less value your vote has to each of them.</i></li><li><i>A giant whale like Sun Yuchen<sub>(Justin Sun's real name)</sub> would be able to put one or two witnesses in the Security Council<sub>(top 20 Witnesses)</sub>, but with each witness the difficulty to insert the next increases exponentially.</i></li></ul><li>There would be no need to keep the 30 votes limit for witnesses.</li></ul><p>It is my personal opinion that having more equal votes available per profile<sub>(30)</sub> than the ammount of <q><i>seats</i></q> in the Security Council<sub>(top 20 Witnesses)</sub> is a recipe for disaster. A vulnerability that allows for an eventual <i>Hostile Takeover</i><sup>TM</sup>.</p><p>If it is too consuming to program and test it, a palliative temporary solution would be to just limit to one witness vote per profile and uncasting the 29 others. It can be uncasting by any criteria, like random, lowest HP witnesses, etc.</p><p>If you don't fully agree or disagree with this idea, please provide your opinion below regarding this specific idea of vote dilution.</p></div>