It's how DPoS naturally is maximally decentralized and each Steem of every user wields equal weight on governance. It's how I think we all expect DPoS works. I haven't understood any good reason for it to be otherwise. I have understood bad reasons for it.
I have been discussing this for weeks, and only @smooth has presented what is a plausible reason for this election mechanism, but what I understood of the risk he discussed it reducing was far less harmful (a 1/3 +1 attack that prevents consensus) than the actual damage this election mechanism has long done to decentralization and now threatens to completely centralize Steem under one user.
It's how DPoS naturally is maximally decentralized and each Steem of every user wields equal weight on governance. It's how I think we all expect DPoS works. I haven't understood any good reason for it to be otherwise. I have understood bad reasons for it.
I have been discussing this for weeks, and only @smooth has presented what is a plausible reason for this election mechanism, but what I understood of the risk he discussed it reducing was far less harmful (a 1/3 +1 attack that prevents consensus) than the actual damage this election mechanism has long done to decentralization and now threatens to completely centralize Steem under one user.