Like I said, non-voting right shares are a real and useful thing. I would like to see Counterparty assets used in corporate governance, for example. Or, say you have a crowd equity model, does someone who put $10 into the hat really have voting rights? So, there’s the non-voting right thing. There’s also why you may want people to have non-voting rights: hostile takeover. In Counterparty, I suppose that looks slightly different than it does today in normal corporations, but the concept is similar. You can create hostile votes, start a referendum on the asset owner, and impeach their reputation publicly & immutably.
For example:
“Is SJCX a scam?”
“Should Shawn Wilkinson step down?”
This feature is obviously bad for asset owners, in my opinion, if just anyone can start a vote. I like the DEVPARTY model (Vote tokens are distributed to a specific list of holders allowing you to have voting and non voting rights) or distributing a VOTETOKEN dividend (For which I believe there is a fee per recipient to prevent spam). With this CIP, I can cheaply graffiti anyone’s asset, squander reputation, change minds, and do all sorts of stuff at the expense of the asset issuer.