The participation in such project is great. But it would be much better if everyone had just one vote. Not like it is at the moment where Mr. A has got 400 votes and Mr. B 200 votes. Can you imagine a project where everyone is equal? That would be something.
Actually, that kind of equality would greatly increase dissatisfaction with outcomes for heavily-invested people or, worse - any disruptive troll could influence the project for little cost. In its present form, those with the most to lose/gain have the greatest potential effect on the project. Furthermore, anyone can join their ranks at any time by committing funds to the coin - putting their money where their mouth is. There is no old boys club with closed ranks - anyone has equal opportunity to join.
The difference is one of "involvement" vs. "commitment". In a meal of bacon and eggs, the chicken was involved but the pig was committed. In DASH-world, greater voting power entails greater commitment. It is a very effective approach.
I choose never to vote, even though I am a MN holder. Despite that, I like the present structure very much - there is strong systemic commitment to make the coin prosper, but anyone involved can ride on the coattails of those who have a lot at stake and presumably know what they are doing (luck notwithstanding).
In any case, it is what it is - if you prefer a different setup, just choose a different coin to support.
