A compromise could be to logarithmically weight the votes based on NXT balance. So a larger NXT balance has more of a say but not linearly more.
A bit of a hassle, but couldn't a large stakeholder sidestep that (or any other method that isn't just a count of the votes) by distributing his/her coins amongst multiple accounts?
Yes. NXT is a proof of stake currency and holders of more NXT should certainly have more of a say in how it's to change if it should. The largest stakeholders have the most to risk after all and so, it's just plain rational that the market would seek the greatest amount of input from those market actors if the currency is to be democratized in this way.
Arguments that amount to "it's unfair" are emotional arguments, not economic ones...generally. The arguments that are economic that favour weighted influence to favour smaller stakeholders are simply wishful thinking when you boil them down.
I agree actually. Stupid people won't though.
We could always vote about how to handle the voting mechanism
But seriously, I'm fine with votes having more weight linearly in accordance with account balance
