If there was, one stake = one vote rule, scale it as much as you want to as many witnesses you want, what happen today wouldn't be possible.
Then voting becomes meaningless when people simply generate thousands and thousands of accounts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack
Sybil resistance is a property that these systems must incorporate, which is why voting must be stake-based.
Sybil attack
In a Sybil attack, the attacker subverts the reputation system of a network service by creating a large number of pseudonymous identities and uses them to gain a disproportionately large influence. It is named after the subject of the book Sybil, a case study of a woman diagnosed with dissociative identity disorder. The name was suggested in or before 2002 by Brian Zill at Microsoft Research. The term pseudospoofing had previously been coined by L. Detweiler on the Cypherpunks mailing list and used in the literature on peer-to-peer systems for the same class of attacks prior to 2002, but this term did not gain as much influence as "Sybil attack".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It is still stake based .... but you cant vote more than once with your one unit of stake.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
@dalz and that would have been a more interesting idea...
Posted via Steemleo
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit