There are a variety of basic structural options that the FCFL could use for vote allocation. It doesn’t appear that this decision has been finalized yet, but they have given some hints what they’re considering. That said, I’m going to run through some possibilities, without initially focusing on which I think they’re likely to adopt.
One token, one vote: This would allocate voting power directly proportionally to the number of tokens held by each fan. This is likely the simplest and easiest approach to understand.
One token, one vote with premium for large holders: This would be similar to the basic ‘one token, one vote’ except with added influence per token for large holders. This has the benefit of providing lots of incentive to purchase large numbers of tokens and of rewarding one segment of FCFL’s ‘best’ customers.
One token, one vote with penalty for large holders: This would be similar to the basic ‘one token, one vote’ except that each incremental token beyond a certain level would be worth less (in terms of voting power) than previous tokens. This has the advantage of limiting how much influence large token holders are able to wield.
Voting power based on ranked holdings: This would give votes based on where each fan ranked as a holder of FAN tokens. For example, if 5 people held tokens, the largest holder would get 5 votes, the 2nd largest holder would get 4 votes, and so on down to 1 vote for the smallest holder.
Voting power based on tiers of ranked holdings: This would be the structure that most closely resembles a poker tournament. It could look something like this – the largest holder gets 5 votes. The 2nd through 4th largest holders get 4 votes. The 5th through 15th largest holders get 3 votes. The 16th through 100th largest holders get 2 votes. All other holders get 1 vote.
