Working on it. Every cICP holder is a UBO.
The reason there is a UBO limit on the IC is because we give nodes for free, whereas on a PoS/dPoS equivalent chain, it would require $750k worth of ICP staked for 8 years to run one node. There is a middle-ground solution for that.
DragginzCorp probably has enough voting power to run ~80 nodes—they have zero.
cICP has enough voting power to run 2 nodes—we’ve got zero as well.
Talks about collusion are far-fetched here.
Ubo refers to ownership.
Ntn will own these nodes and draggin corp owns 35% of ntn dao. That is a node cluster between the two entities
Imagine the size of the cluster if other SNS project decide they want to be node providers in the future and Adam/Dragginz owns 20%, 35%, 50% or more of the voting power in those SNS projects. Talk about SYBILing nodes! 
Exploiting IC Network…Community Action Required! Thank you @mico for your efforts to highlight this double standard and exploitation risk now before the problem grows too big. We should be very cautious about SNS projects owning nodes specifically because there is no real limit to how much voting power a single person can own in an SNS and they can own a majority stake in many SNS projects. The cluster would be big and should be disallowed.
You already know my stance. I’ve written about it at length and you were active in the discusssion.
Yes there are potential clustering issues that need mitigating. This much is obvious. There are ways to mitigate this, and significant benefits to doing so.
Let’s wait a see what a concrete proposal looks like.