For the top witnesses, it boggles my mind that some have proposals to fund hive infrastructure - when the witness rewards could more than sustain that infrastructure at this stage and at current price of the hive token.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
To my understanding, running a full node is not a requirement for a Witness. Also the market is quite volatile so cancelling a proposal is taking a risk of seeing Hive price going down and having the infrastructure unpaid. Now that we are fully decentralised we need something stable.
Maybe the community to un-support those types of proposals until we need to put it back on top. But like with Witness votes, it seems that proposal votes are a little bit too... sticky...
But I agree with you, there are proposals that are overrated and again like for witness votes, your vote and mine don't count for much...
Full node may not be a requirement, but I'm definitely going to support the witnesses that elect to run one over one that doesn't - those full nodes are what keeps the lights on so to speak.
If the witness rewards aren't enough to fund the ongoing network infrastructure, then there's something wrong with the network itself, or the token value.
Hive is incredibly sustainable right now. I hope the witnesses are saving for a rainy day in case it comes.
It's definitely a plus and shows that the witness owner want to add value to his/her participation. Pure coincidence, @roelandp just launched his own full node cluster made of 3 hefty servers: https://hivean.com/hive-139531/@roelandp/announcing-my-hive-full-api-cluster-hive-roelandp-nl
The requirement I mentioned is what is defined in the whitepaper. But the community is voting for witnesses so the community can set the requirement.