I strongly agree. It would also be very simple to do, by the same battle tested mechanism that has been used for years with upvotes. Just apply VP to witness votes, and deplete VP 100%, recharging at 0%. Each vote depletes the VP of the stake it represents, so that same stake is not able to be voted again on another witness until that vote is withdrawn.
I would prefer that should I want to vote for two witnesses, my VP not be necessarily divided in half, but that if I want to vote 2/3 of my stake for one, and 1/3 for the other, that split is at my sole option. Voters should have the ability to determine what support they provide of the stake they have to provide it with.
Presently, it's all or nothing for every witness vote, but I reckon 1t=1v allows us to better express our intentions. I also see no reason to have any limit on the number of witnesses you could vote for if 1t=1v is adopted, and we can determine how much support we throw each witness we vote for.
Thanks!
I strongly agree with your objection and counterproposal. Your idea sounds much better.
But I am curious about what you might think about the Expiration part to prevent dead accounts from influencing the Blockchain.
Also, if is not much to ask, could you please either reblog or copy-paste those ideas? If you copy-paste(and edit) don't need to credit me as my intention is for those proposals to reach the most people possible regardless of who gets authorship credit.