The assets will be chosen by council based on public opinion.
There is much work to do still. (-;
I understand you but basically we're just recreating what we see not to work in the real world. By giving vote per silkcoin capacity we're giving the minority the right to lead the vote.
I don't know. I think this is a really important point. Maybe I'm too idealistic because I believe in the disruptive power of BTC and cryptocurrencies.
We have something valuable in our hand and continuing the old order will not help us in my opinion.
I repeat that's really hard to find a suitable and innovative solution given these conditions.
Example:
One's an anarchyst: there will be election. He has choices (X party, B party, F party and so on) but he doesn't feel represented because he believes in anarchy. What is he going to do? He will not vote beacuse he sees that no matter of his choice he's gonna lose anyway.
Silkcoin related example:
Please don't misunderstand me, now we're voting on a website name. But one day we might vote for something more relevant. And yes of course now we're testing the platform.
If we take the previous example I made and I know that there's a quite long rich list I might not going to vote since my voting "power" is so little compared to that minority.
Then it seems to me we're gonna have an aristocracy here. Which can be fine since I could trust the devs supposedly they have the biggest bags. But of that I can't be certain, we might have everything or everyone behind these addresses.
I don't know if you can see what I mean but, for the last time, recreating a lobbying system in here is not gonna work.
I do believe that cryptocurrency must evolve in a complete different way from things like banking system, democracy and so forth.
But, maybe, as I said I'm really too idealistic.
My 2 silk