I've been busy traveling lately (D.C., San Fransisco, Las Vegas), and noticed I've been dropping in witness rankings from #2 to #19. Some larger unvotes started a couple weeks ago:
With some more activity today:
I think flags and downvotes play a role as well expressing your opinions on who should be a witness and who shouldn't. I've talked about flags quite a bit here which links to other posts like this one here. If Bernie wants to stay anonymous to continue flagging and (what I consider) trolling, that's up to him. I've asked him to come on a live video chat to discuss his views about Steem, SteemitInc, and me as an individual (he considers me a pretentious douchebag), but he always declines my request. The invitation is still open.
What I did find interesting is a reminder of how much DPoS may just be a popularity contest. For a while I was ranked as high as number two out of all Steem witnesses. That made no sense to me. There are many other amazing witnesses providing very real value to the ecosystem with the many projects and contributions they make. I've had a number of people thank me for my contributions as well in terms of providing trusted commentary, education, context, and understanding of the larger cryptocurrency space which I've been doing since 2013, but does that really justify a number two spot? If a witness position is mostly about trust in securing a node, I guess that could make sense, but even then there are other trustworthy witnesses out there who may not be as active as I am on chain (while some are far more active) and might deserve that spot more than me.
So how are token holders supposed to determine who is trustworthy and who deserves a witness vote? Few people will read through the 3+ years of Steem content some witnesses like myself have published, so it comes down to a general sense of popularity which is constantly shifting and changing. Some take issue with my announcement in April of 2018 to work with eosDAC or my work with FIO which I started officially 5 months ago, and yet my witness ranking kept increasing. In my opinion, tribalism is not a good thing, and my involvement in many different cryptocurrency projects is exactly why I bring unique value as a witness. It's why I sold my business in 2018 and why I don't think I'll ever have a traditional job again.
My work with eosDAC is why some looked to me for leadership during some drama with Steemit, Inc powering down their stake and helped me come up with some possible solutions like a SteemDAC. But that was then and this is now. When I see hugely valuable witnesses like 
Maybe in the end, it doesn't really matter as long as the blocks are being secured by trusted nodes. As long as token holders continue to vote based on what is in the best interests of securing their investment, then we should be okay regardless of who is in the top 20. I'm glad to give perspective from many angles, including EOS which, with the launch of Voice, will be (IMO) one of the first real competitors for the Steem blockchain. Competition is good and healthy. I hope we learn from all chains and implement what we can from them to improve and grow.
As always, I'm available as a witness to answer questions you have. Though I have been busy with consulting, I will continue my passion to help educate people about cryptocurrency and how it can be used to improve human wellbeing. I still see Steem, today, as the most viable functioning blockchain solution for everyday users to enjoy. Many of my friends who shared my excitement about Steem have come and gone, but I'm still here. I plan to stay. This is still my home on the Internet.
What do you think about witness voting? Is it just a popularity contest?
If it is, what can we do to change it to more actively reflect its purpose of voting in trustworthy node operators?
