–
Yup, this is a fair point that I’m still putting some thought into. I addressed some of it here:
The Zcash network (meaning all ZEC-holders, inclusive of Electric Coin Company and Zcash Foundation employees) will be the sole decision-making-body for awarding Zertilizer through majority* vote rule.
*Alternatively, if it is determined that network participation is insufficient to ensure a fair and statistically significant voting body, it can be decided that a ‘voting committee’ should be appointed by the Zcash network for the purpose of managing Zertilizer funding.
In this case, the voting committee could be an existing entity like the zcash foundation and community governance panel.
–
That being said, it would be worth exploring staking solutions and innovative incentive mechanisms for voting. Like mentioned here:
6. Should there be a ‘staking’ mechanism whereby members have the option to stake more ZEC in order to have greater influence on the voting decision? How much ZEC should be required to vote? (something akin to Dash’s masternodes)
–
I’m also playing with the idea of Vesting, which I see you commented on (but have not had the chance to review, yet): Decentralized Participatory Voting through VESTING
–
Ultimately, if we want to move towards decentralized governance community input and participation will be key. However, there must be a proper incentive-structure to support the expectation of participation. This is what my next article will talk about.
Think about it this way: I want advertisers to pay me for my time spent watching their ad’s (like the Brave Browser model). As such I have an incentive to participate in the advertising economy. Same thing here, can we find a way to reward Zcashers for Vesting long-term and participating in voting by 1.) awarding more voting rights/weight by vesting (aka. holding ZEC) longer-term and 2.) rewarding ZEC for holding and voting (like a % interest in a traditional savings account).
–
another tangent, sorry.