Bitcrab, you haven't voted for my witness for months, not sure why. I have been running 2 load balanced API servers for 8 months now, and I operate 6 full nodes including the testnet. I'm not perfect but I'm human.
With only a small amount of time to check and interest in what witnesses do, you would see I am highly active and tuned into the technical needs of this ecosystem. I write a report every month and publish it on steemit, how many witnesses even publish a regular report of what they are doing? How many witnesses receive feedback about their operation?
We all have specialties of expertise, some broader, some deeper. It is unreasonable to expect of anyone to be all things in all situations on a systems as complex as crypto, with it's politics, economics, technical, marketing and managerial aspects. You yourself were not tuned into the technical aspects of running a witness and you stepped away from that role to focus on other matters you felt you were better at or could better serve the ecosystem by. That was a wise move on your part.
I feel there are few recognized standard requirements for witnesses, and each proxy is free to choose what requirements they wish to support. You continue to state what your requirements are to support a witness, but I don't feel you vote according to them consistently.
We have identified a growing issue in our ecosystem that witnesses across the board (every witness is affected) misses blocks regularly now. It's very rare now to go to Roeland's witness log without seeing that every witness has missed at least 1 or more blocks with a 7 day period. Some of the highest ranked witnesses have missed block rates > 1 per day. It didn't used to be that way, and this trend has been increasing for some time. I mention this to suggest that the absolute number of blocks missed is less important than the rate they are accumulating for each witness. Something perhaps you might take into consideration and not focus only on the total number of blocks missed. witness.still holds the record for that, but look how stable he is now. It isn't fair to hold that against him now, tho it should serve as a stern warning to prospective witnesses to get your act together on the testnet first, to avoid such problems.
I submitted a pull request months ago to include my public API nodes as seeds, as at the time there was no convention for which nodes API would be included in the wallet UI. The wallet UI had undergone many changes in the area of improving connection reliability and it is proving to be a difficult issue to resolve.
You didn't list and of my API nodes for some reason. I am here to tell you, since you obviously aren't aware of them. Shouldn't you be? I don't operate in a vacuum, it isn't hidden information. Do you even look at my witness reports? It seems you don't. What you ask for in terms of vote support for committee, are you yourself doing what you expect other committee members to do?
My 2 load balanced API nodes are:
- wss://bts.proxyhosts.info/wss
- wss://nohistory.proxyhosts.info/wss
I am due for another witness report, expect it before the weekend. I will describe how I plan to revise my approach to utilize docker to improve deployment of new nodes as well as increase their security. I hope that satisfies your request, and I hope you will revise your witness votes to include verbaltech2.
Topic: Proxy: bitcrab - make the ecosystem grow (Read 12709 times)
