I agree, razorwave8, and that's a great analogy. The sanctity of every individual's vote when you're electing leaders into governance is extremely important. When it gets undermined, it corrupts the entire system. A lot of things with blockchain have gotten turned on its head. E.g., wallets are normally opaque, and voting is generally a private affair in real life. The blockchain reverses these two entirely, eliminating privacy, and it causes people to meddle in the affairs of others when they ought not too. This destroys the intention of both wallets and voting. Can you imagine walking down the street and every person you pass knew how much money you have in your wallet, or had access to your purchase history? Or can you imagine going to the polls and getting jumped after you exit because of what candidate you chose to vote for? The blockchain is steadily trying to get us to conform to an abnormal system, and in this conforming, it expects us to be okay with making victims out of people in ways that we wouldn't dream of doing in the waking world. This is the insidious world of Skinneresque behaviouralism, where new and foreign systems are introduced that alter natural behavior. It's all fun and games now, but when we're on the federal blockchain and resist vaccination only to have funds withheld or confiscated, people will look back and feel pretty bad about their prior behavior and not respecting the liberty of other individuals.
RE: What's your preference regarding the airdrop proposals?