… or they could distribute 1 million on 100 accounts with 10 000 DOT/ADA and, hence, 100 votes for a total of 10 000 votes.
… or on 10 000 accounts with 100 DOT/ADA and, hence, 10 votes for a total of 100 000 votes.
… or on 1 million accounts for a total of 1 million votes.
Depends on how important the vote is if it is worth the effort to do this splitting. …, but we want to do really important votes.
Registering an account could be made expensive to discourage this, but that would, of course, affect all people registering and might discourage small accounts even more than whale splitting.
Registering and voting could be made deliberately effort-full and hard to automate, but – again if the vote is important enough – it’s just a game of whack-a-mole to prevent automation, while it makes the experience a lot worse for everybody else.
Bottom line: Quadratic voting – just as “one person, one vote” – is only really possible if we have some way to identify voters and ensure that they can have at most one identity, one voting account.
… and there is nothing that could guarantee that at world scale at the moment. Democratic countries do more or less successful attempts in general elections, but that totally depends on having centralised control and knowledge about your populace.
Nope, there is nothing in the DID/SSI pipe dreams that even tries to be a solution to this.