The word "decaying" is again a word being taken from EOS, while we should look at our own code and adapt to it and implemement what has been learned from real life.
i.e. When we vote, we vote for a "term in office", simple as that. (lets say 365 days)
Only diff. here being that anyone can change their vote at any time.
= "0"
and vote for someone else = "1" which would again have a max term on that vote of 365 days
ALL in line with our current code.
Hi Jack
Well as you can see from the above, a decaying vote (losing its MVEST total week by week) would have little effect on the rankings. Going from 365 - 465 without the decay doesn't change things much, and so for me, decaying by a % each week is not worth looking into at present.
Cheers!
I dare say that a "decaying vote" is not only a pain in the rear in comparison to a "fixed term vote, from date of voting" as far as coding goes, but also a blunder of an idea which definitely is NOT looking after the investors best interests in any way.
Due to the possible complexity of coding, lack of real change to the rankings, and the idea that a vote is a vote until it is not a vote, I would side with you on this :)