I think Chugwig’s idea of combining balance-weighted voting with a multiplier for account age solves the problem of fairness for both newcomers and long-term supporters.
A vote based only on account age has the flaw of excluding new community members if there is a cut-off date, or opening the door to vote manipulation if there is not a cut-off date. A second flaw is that if someone wants maximum voting power, they will have to combine NIM balances into their oldest account. This could leave an on-chain trail linking many financial transactions to one person. Lastly, a vote based on account age opens the door to old accounts being offered for sale, although the incredible amount of risk involved in sending NIM to an unsecure account will probably deter most people from doing this.
A vote based only on account balance has the flaw of valuing wealthier community members over others. A second flaw is that it disproportionally favors newcomers. Consider that the amount of NIM someone can buy for $500 right now would have cost them $50,000 three years ago. A person who only heard of Nimiq yesterday will be given 100x the voting power of some of the project’s early investors/supporters/developers.
A vote that combines account age and balance is inclusive of both sides of the equation. New community members will have an opportunity to vote, long-term community members won’t be at a disadvantage because of NIM’s currently low price. To me this seems like the best option so far.