Thanks for raising this concern @dfisher and @wpb.
I think it is also interesting to consider how this could be achieved without additional incentives. For example, as @wpb mentioned, it might have an effect if some larger neurons just sit out a few proposals (e.g., if they anyways have a clear outcome). Or indeed it could be an outcome that it is better to have a larger team behind a known neuron. Or different smaller known neurons could span together and e.g., vote most of the time but follow the other known neuron’s vote in case where they missed a proposal… I am not saying that any of these are necessarily the best solution, these are just a few ideas to illustrate that it could be interesting to also think about processes etc and not only features to address certain problems.
In any case, I agree that this is an interesting problem to consider, but also think it does not take away the value from this initiative. I agree that this could be discussed in the context of the longer-term solution or as a follow up to the priodic rest of following - which is more targeted at this “side” - e.g., at motivating voters to change their following rather than at motivating voting neurons.