For many of these criticisms, can't we strike the balance by designing rules based on an individual's proxy-power (ie the #people for which they proxy). For example:
re:1) For any individual exercising a proxy-power <10, all votes are explicitly private. For any individual exercising proxy-power >=10, all votes are explicitly public.
re:2) Monitoring, transparency, ethics rules, etc increase in proportion with proxy-power.
re:3) Budget and staffing increase in proportion with proxy-power.
Additionally: Proxy-power is capped (e.g. 0.5% of national population). If you try to assign proxy-power to someone who has met the cap, then the assignment is rejected.
re:1) For any individual exercising a proxy-power <10, all votes are explicitly private. For any individual exercising proxy-power >=10, all votes are explicitly public.
re:2) Monitoring, transparency, ethics rules, etc increase in proportion with proxy-power.
re:3) Budget and staffing increase in proportion with proxy-power.
Additionally: Proxy-power is capped (e.g. 0.5% of national population). If you try to assign proxy-power to someone who has met the cap, then the assignment is rejected.