In that case the account who can make your proposal never happen, can make there proposal pass easily too.

I've never made a proposal, so I don't know if the DHF allows the proposal maker to vote for their own project. Lasseehlers upvotes his posts but didn't upvote his proposal, so there is a possibility that isn't allowed. I'll need to find out how that works before I can knowledgeably respond to that point.

What I think I might be able to say is that making a proposal may fall under contract law. When making a proposal, you are promising to carry out a plan if and when you receive the requested funds. Maybe something can be done under civil law if someone doesn't follow through. Perhaps a proposal could be made for a fund to get legal assistance. If someone with a large enough amount of HP can pass their proposal and is also given the power to downvote, they could foil attempts for Hive to assemble a paid legal team to go after them.

I'm sorry but i didn't understand that part well i think, you mean a 10m HP downvote isn't fair ?

You're right I could have been more clear. My bad.

So, similar to what was allegedly done by Justin Sun during the hostiule takeover. I don't think it was ever 100% proven that Justin Sun collaborated with exchanges to vote in new steem witnesses. I believe that did happen. Regardless, what if someone like Justin Sun or several rich entities wanted to make it so every DHF proposal made from now on never passes? It would be a simple brute force attack by just staking enough HP to cancel out all the upvotes for any new propoasal to impede the progress of our blockchain.

Anyway i was just posting thoughts to know some general opinion of people, but yeah your almost the only person to read the post and comment so yeah.

I am just beginning to learn blockchain development. I am sure if you presented this to someone with much more experience and who knows far more they would ask even more probing questions. I am not claiming the DHF proposal system is perfect. It could be better but whatever is done first needs to stand up to scrutiny. As a beginner the one thing I know for sure is that every change made to a blockchain is given a lot of examination and as many aspects as possible are considered.

Yeah your right whales are a probleme for the downvotes, but for the upvotes too.

Upvotes being just as problematic as downvotes seems to negate the whole purpose of the system. Maybe it's the "lesser of two evils" thing but I can't think of as many scenarios in which upvoting can be done maliciously as downvoting.