Does anyone think this is a problem?
The mechanism is a smart contract.
While this is currently happening in Catalyst, my understanding is that there is no reason this can not be done against CIP-1694 governance. That’s because according to Sabastian of DC Spark, there is no way to differentiate between a smart contract and a user wallet.
Yep imo it is a problem however it should be pretty easy to make it to expensive to “abuse” this.
Instead of having a snapshot at a certain time, you could consider the last 20 snapshots and use the median to determine the voting power for each wallet. This way you would have to buy such a bond for 20 epochs which will make it way more expensive.
That helps for Catalyst but how does that help with CIP-1694 when users delegate to DReps and leave their delegation indefinitely?