I think this is the real problem you are trying to solve. I agree that this is a problem worth solving. That problem is solved on the WTN governance side by having more known neurons and whales who decide to take personal responsibility for their own vote instead of simply following some else that they find out later that doesn’t represent their own best interested. The more you have invested, the more compelled you you should be to take action.
WaterNeuron is not intended to give you a NNS voting power boost, it is intended to give you purely an investment boost in exchange for a shorter lockup period. In fact, the fundamental design is to separate the governance utility of ICP from the investment utility of ICP. When you choose to stake your ICP with WaterNeuron, you are giving up the NNS voting rights of that ICP. Those governance rights fundamentally belong to the WaterNeuron SNS for as long as you choose to leave that ICP staked with WaterNeuron.
I agree with this sentiment, but would phrase it differently…to whoever wants to control the NNS governance rights of their ICP, please buy ICP and stake it for 8 years like everyone else. Staking ICP with WaterNeuron with the expectation that you will control that ICP governance utility is a losing proposition. WaterNeuron is intended to give you an investment boost only. When you stake your ICP with WaterNeuron, you are intentionally giving the NNS voting rights to the owners of the WaterNeuron SNS token, which is the WTN token. If you want to have a say in how the WaterNeuron SNS decided to trigger it’s vote on NNS proposals, then you need to own the WTN token.
Where does this quote come from? Is this how you see WaterNeuron today? Or is this a quote from someone else? Would you please elaborate on how you/they think you can buy WTN voting power on the cheap through a loophole? Also, in what way are rewards not distributed proportionally to all SNS investors?
If I recall correctly, something like 90+% of all WTN tokens are staked in the SNS, so it’s not possible for someone to buy enough WTN to actually take over the WTN vote. It would certainly become prohibitively expensive for someone to try. Even if a person or organization, be it the WTN team, CodeGov, DFINITY, or any other known neuron were to accumulate more than 50% voting power in the WTN SNS through following, the solution to that problem is to more equally distribute the voting power by having many credible and reliable known neurons and for the entire SNS to rally around promoting those known neuron options.
Every known neuron, and every private neuron, in the WTN SNS is capable of controlling their own vote on NNS proposals. They can relay the vote from any NNS known neuron that they want and it can be automatic. This capability has been out there since day 1. WaterNeuron could even build the capability into the WaterNeuron app in a trustless way to make it easily accessible to everyone if there were demand. There is no reason why every WTN owner couldn’t configure their own NNS/WTN vote relay pair in their own wallet or profile page on waterneuron.fi. In my opinion, this is the most important feature that the WTN team could be building right now.
While the WTN team actually triggers the most voting power on every topic via following today (a problem common to every SNS and the NNS), they have always been very receptive to other known neurons in the WaterNeuron SNS. In fact, they intentionally try to avoid making themselves the only Followee choice. WaterNeuron is already one of the most decentralized SNS projects there is today. What am I missing?