You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why not unapprove inactive witnesses ?
I think there could be a lack of understanding of how to determine who is deserving of our votes.
All I know is I heard Ned in an interview say we need to expect more than just mining from our witnesses. So I have been actively searching out the witness thread looking for folks like yourself that contribute to the community as a whole.
I have also found it hard to find candidates not on the top 50 list so thanks for posting the link...
I agree with this more than the OP. Entirely inactive witnesses are obviously a wasted vote but having a price feed or not on a low backup is not itself a big concern. I'd vote for a backup witness who is contributing to the community but lacks a good price feed over one who has a great price feed but does nothing else.
When it comes to the top 19 (or high backups that could soon become top 19), server infrastructure, reliability, price feed (both that it is maintained along with the policy used by the witness to determine the price being fed), etc. are all important. This includes not only the primary server, but also backups server(s), seed node(s), and other infrastructure (network connections, etc.). For the top 19, the core server and network infrastructure constitutes the minimum requirement, and no witness failing on any of these points should be voted in. On top of all that, consider how the witness contributes more to the community.
Also extremely important is the role of witnesses (especially top 19) in governance, since witnesses decide on software upgrades which ultimately determine the underlying rules of the network. For this consideration, vote for witnesses who have relevant knowledge, experience, good judgment, and are accessible and responsive to your own concerns and interests on these matters as a stakeholder and network user.
Smooth Then we agree on something anyway
Thank you for noticing. i will fix it
https://steemd.com/witnesses
Thanks :)