New Witness voting rules we may need to do

Today I came across some interesting considerations of future witness votes in article by @fernandosoder

It is already expired, so I decided to make a new, fresh post.

First of all, I'm strongly against for using (in any possible way) the "reputation" factor. It is just meaningless.
Justin Sun, (or any possible his imitators), keeping millions of steem, could easily master any required number of sock-puppets, with any reputation, be it set at 50, or 60 or 65. In my almost FOUR year long endeavor on Steemit - I've seen multiple times how easy all this can be.

The @fernandosoder 's proposed vote dilution and expiration scheme, in general seems
more or less OK to me.

But....
we should find how to limit transferring the huge voting influence along with purchasing huge amounts of steem.
Everybody can always sell his property (steem) freely, but not the witness voting influence.
Which should be based mainly on one's experience, dedication, time and levels of one's investments into Steem. Do you agree?

So what if to put into voting power several factors, which are time based, and investment based, and could not be Mastered in a fake way, in a very short time?

My thoughts:

The ACTUAL voting-for-witness power (VWP), at any given moment - should be a mixture, a composite of several time based factors, such as account AGE, and AGE of his held SP.

Like this:
VWP= N * MINSP

where
VWP - actual voting-for-witness power, expressed in a "steem-power-month"

N- quantity of full Months of the voting account, which voter wants to be used, and which he(she) can select on his own, as long as it meets the rule below:

this N can be free selectable by the voter, and can be from 1 (minimum) to a full quantity of months (maximum) since the last time voters account has CHANGED (or created) it's MASTER password, or ACTIVE password.

MINSP- The MINIMUM level of SP, which stayed in place in voters account during period of last "N" month. With maximum N selected, most likely the MINSP will be far from maximum.
Those two factors in most cases will be interacting against each-other.

And all these things can always and easy be found on the blockchain. Not a huge task for good code writer.

Initially I was thinking of strictly only account's age (based on creation date), but as wee see from Ned Scott's example - purchase of SP can be done by simply giving away all the passwords, without actually moving tokens to a different, or newly created account.
However, every purchaser will always change the passwords, and not keep the old ones, right?

With this scheme, we avoid from witness-voting all the HUGE SP amounts, no matter how big they are, if owner is just not older than ONE month.
As example, someone keeping only 100000 SP for 30+ month, will have just as much influence as somebody who just purchased 3 MLN SP only one month ago.
And those with less than one month ago - will have to hold their breath, and...wait a bit. :)

Did you get the idea?
(sorry, but English is not my prime language, and I do not know how to explain all this more understandably)

All together with @fernandosoder 's proposed expiration, dilution - we may get noticeably better security against take-overs, as we had until now.

Your thoughts?

@onealfa

P.S.
If you have not set yet your witness vote - maybe the easiest and by far the quickest way is to set a voting proxy. I have done my proxy to @theycallmedan, as I see him representing my considerations at the very best.