Long Term Stock Exchange Fallacy?

The new idea for the “start up / owner friendly” Long Term Stock Exchange offers “Tenure Voting” which means that owning a share for ten years gives you 10x the voting power of a new share owner. (1, 2, 3)

This seems backwards to me, the longest holders don’t necessarily have the longest forward view of the company.  Don’t you want to offer the most voting power to those who plan on holding the stock the longest prospectively?  So, for example at voting time, you could lock in your shares for X years and get the voting leverage there.  This is harder, because if you commit to X years and lose on some vote then you’re locked in to a board/decision that you’re not into.  One solution is “only wining votes commitments stick” – an incentive to not to vote or commit – this seems good, if you care and commit you get leverage, if you don’t you get freedom.  Another solution to accidental long commitments is to codify exit terms.  Doing both solutions would probably work.