I'm a Decred holder, mainly as a optional bet on Bitcoin suffering from lack of a governance model and PoW centralization. However maybe Decred also have some possible weaknesses? I see 2 weaknesses of PoS-only based securing of the integrity of the chain and voting in proposals. These are, using real world examples: 1 Peercoin where PoS is the only mechanism to secure the blockchain (save for checkpointing) suffers from the fact that people are content with holding their coins on exchange even though they can't mint with the coins when they do (don't ask me why... I even done this myself). This means that a malicious exchange could attack Peercoin using these coins, because they control the private keys. I understand that Decred offers some protection against this, because Decred is also secured by PoW, but an exchange would still be able to vote. 2 The PoS secured NuBits (https://www.nubits.com) offered voting on the blockchain. This did not fully protect the project from being attacked from within. From what I gather its creator, Jordan, had too many coins and therefor also voting power. As a DAO/DAC NuBits wasn't strong enough and many of the project members who considered blockchain based voting/governance model a feature, changed their minds about it and doesn't think it's a good idea any longer. I'm very curious to know what I'm missing here and why Decred doesn't have these kinds of weaknesses? I'm also curious to know if there are any former Peercoin/NuBits people here, who knows what I'm talking about here and don't see the above as a problem.