When I joined Steem back in July of 2016, the top witness positions were idolized and admired by many in the community - myself included. These were the elite wizards who kept the blockchain running, and made decisions about the future of our chain! They could be seen actively working on various projects to improve the platform and community, and lots of people respected their views. They also made a lot of $$$!
The "Untouchables"
At the time I joined, there was a lot of chat about the witnesses. Some good, some bad. Many of the things that I kept hearing over and over though were:
- Unless you were already in the "in crowd" there was no way to become a top witness.
- It is impossible to become a top witness unless you were one of the early adopters.
- The people who are already in the top have an unfair advantage, because they got votes from a bunch of stakeholders that are no longer actively voting.
- There are tons of witnesses in the top 20 doing nothing, and they are never going to get replaced.
Sound familiar?
I have been hearing the same things repeated over and over since 2016, and they still continue to be repeated today!
Defying the odds
Those of you who already know me probably know by now that I'm a pragmatic optimist. I am not delusional, but I am always going to try and look for a positive outcome regardless of the situation. I am not going to simply accept negative view-points from people just because they are the prevailing way of looking at the world.
One thing that I noticed after I had been here for a couple of months is that there were several backup witnesses who were doing A LOT. Seemingly quite a bit more than those currently in the top..
@jesta is the first person that I watched work his way to the top. Watching @jesta's climb to the top was one of the primary experiences that shaped my view on our community, stakeholders, and witnesses. He worked his tail off! He built so many amazing tools, and did so much for the community that he probably touched the lives of every single person using the platform. Even if people didn't know who @jesta was, they were probably benefiting from one or more of the tools that he made.
@jesta was doing so much for the community, that after a while - people started asking: how is he not already a top witness?? It still took several more months after that point before he finally got into the top, but after a long (6-12 month?) journey - he finally made it!
@jesta was not the only one who made the trek to the top either. @anyx, @gtg, and many others did too.
What I found most interesting was the grumbling about how impossible it was to make it into the top kept persisting, but new people continued to make it into the top..
After being part of the community for about about four months, I decided to become a witness. My initial goal was just to get to the point where I was high enough to produce enough blocks to cover the costs of my witness and seed node servers, and I didn't really have any expectation of becoming a top witness (after all - it was "impossible" for someone like me), but I did do everything I could to add value wherever I could.
I followed a similar path to those I had seen go before me, and worked my tail off for months. I didn't know anybody when I first got here, so I engaged with the community and got to know people. I took positions on important decisions facing the community, and made a name for myself as an "influencer" - helping to shape public perception and drive consensus. I started to propose my own ideas on what seemed like important issues at the time, and did the work to turn those ideas into action. I worked on many large projects that added value to the community and helped our users (like adding the FAQ page to condenser with @pfunk). I got to know many of the large stakeholders and learned what they cared about, and focused on things that were important to them.
It took me about 3-4 months to get to a "break even" point (where I at least wasn't loosing money on my campaign), and that wasn't even counting all the "unpaid work" that I was doing. It took many more months of that before I was even a contender for a top spot, and months after that before I actually made it in. After many many months of consistent effort though, I did it. I was in. I was a top witness.
Shortly after making it into the top, I was quoted in an interview:
"I also always thought that the whole point of being a witness was to do things for the community. If anyone could just setup a witness node and start earning a profit, it would probably attract the wrong type of people.
Since then [becoming a top witness], I have just continued to try and find the best ways that I could add value to the community. I think to some extent the initial shock has worn off a bit, but I am still amazed and honored that I actually made it to one of the top witness spots. I am really proud of the work that I have done, and it means a lot to me that the people in the community have valued what I've done and voted on me for witness. I hope to continue to serve as an example to newer witnesses that it is possible to make it to the top, but it takes a huge amount of effort to get there."
Since that day, I have seen countless witnesses follow the same path. The key is that it takes a LOT of work (way more than most people realize) but it can be done.
What does it really take to make it in?
I have closely watched the witness campaigns of many of our community's witnesses over the past four years. I have seen countless witnesses work their way to the top, and I have seen even more fail. I have gotten to the point where I can usually fairly accurately see a top witness "coming" about 2-3 months before they actually make it in. There is a pattern.
I have coined a term for it called the "splash effect". The people who make it into the top are following the same path that @jesta, myself, and many of the other top witnesses have followed. They are doing so much for the platform/community that they can't be ignored. They reach and exceed the point where everybody starts to question how are they not already a top witness??
For all the backup witnesses who are sitting there thinking to themselves (or sometimes out loud): why am I not a top witness? I am doing so much more than the other top 20 witnesses. It is not fair. I have a blunt answer for you: you are not doing enough.
To truly "make a splash" you have to identify a need that the community has that is significant enough to have a noticeable impact, and meet the need in such an explosive way that the shock-waves of your impact are felt across the entire community. You also need to continue to deliver an indisputable about of value to the community over an extended period of time.
I realize that is a harsh thing to say, and I expect to get a lot of whiny responses in the comments about all the reasons why things are just so unfair, but whatever excuses you want to try and pull together - I have heard them before. Despite the unique situation you think you are in which is the reason you are not making it to the top - there have been others before you, and there will be others after you, who will do what it takes to make it in.
Some key things that I often see witnesses doing wrong are:
- They overvalue the contributions that they are making.
- They think that because they are doing more than the "lazy" top 20, they are owed a top 20 spot.
- They expect stakeholders to just appreciate whatever pet project they are doing to contribute.
- They do not demonstrate that they are able to build consensus around an idea.
- They take positions that are too extreme and/or against the views of the large stakeholders. (Note: It is OK to take these positions if they are truly what you believe, but if you do - then it is on you to "win" people over to your side.)
- They only care about the "little guy" and demonize large stakeholders.
- They burn bridges with prominent community members.
- They put their own interests above the needs of the platform/community.
- They focus on certain aspects of their campaign and do well in those, but are week in other areas. Examples include: socializing with the community, networking with stakeholders, getting recognition for the hard work they are doing, influencing views on important platform decisions, demonstrating that they have what it takes to be a leader, and making contributions that grow the value of the platform/token.
- Their splash is not big enough.
There is inertia once you are in the top, but the "mighty" do fall
One of the things that I often hear is how the top witnesses are not doing anything at all, and just sitting on top leaching witness rewards. While this typically tends to ignore everything they did to get into the top in the first place, it is also usually said with a defeatist attitude that implies we are doomed to a fate where they remain in the top - leaching off the rest of us forever.
Let me show you something. This is the witness list back from hardfork 11:
How many of those witnesses do you still see in the top today?
There are a few who have continued to add value over the extended period of time and are still there today, but most are gone. They have been replaced with new witnesses who proved themselves by making their "splash".
I would bet money too that if you took a screenshot of the top 20 witnesses today and came back in one year, that there would have been significant turnover and a lot of new faces.
It takes a lot of work to make it in, and once you are there - it does take a lot to push you out. But the actual reality of the situation (not just a political opinion from someone who is upset they aren't in the top) is that the witnesses who do not continue to add value get replaced with ones who do.
My views on vote decay
A lot of witnesses who are upset that they are not in the top try to sell the idea of "vote decay" as a way to make it easier for backup witnesses to make it to the top.
Want to know a good way to convince me not to vote for you? Start talking about how the system is rigged and we should take development effort away from other important priorities in order to make it easier for you to make it to the top, because you are not wiling to put in the work to get there on your own.
In my view, the fact that it is so hard to make it to the top is a good thing. This helps to secure out network against attackers. It also separates the strong from the weak, and helps to ensure that the people who make it to the top actually have what it takes.
Quit whining about how unfair things are, and go work on your splash.
Abandoned accounts
There is a separate (unrelated) part of vote decay that I do support, and that is if a stakeholder has abandoned their account (due to lost keys, death, etc.) that after a certain amount of time their votes should no longer count.
A pragmatic proposal that I have stated in the past is:
A stakeholder's votes could be removed if they have not used their active/owner key in a period of N days (for some very large N, such as 365 days).
This is something that I do think is worth doing, as time allows.
An interesting twist to this is what if a stakeholder used Steem, but never used Hive? Should stakeholders have 1 year from the day of the Steem / Hive split hardfork to use their active key on the Hive blockchain in order to have their votes continue to count? Something to think about..
Isn't there a security risk to the top 20 positions being slow moving?
An argument that I often hear from people trying to make the case for vote decay (again - to make it easier for them to get in) is that there is a security risk due to the fact that it takes so long to get voted out. In other words, if it takes so long for a top witness to get removed, what if there is an issue that requires them to be removed quickly?
What I have seen in practice is that there are always enough large stakeholders around at a given point in time to quickly shift around the top spots if it is necessary. There is not enough to take someone from 0 to 20 in an instant, but if a compromised top witness (or witnesses) need to be taken out quickly, it can be done.
This has actually happened on many occasions where there was a need to remove a top witness (or group) and replace them with a backup, and every time there has been a need - it was executed very quickly.
DPoS Requires Partition
The security of the Hive blockchain requires that stakeholders take their role in DPoS seriously. This means voting for witnesses, and periodically reviewing your votes to ensure that the witnesses you are voting for still meet your criteria.
If you do not feel comfortable deciding who to vote for (or don't want to spend the time), you have the option to proxy your witness vote to someone else. If you set an account as your proxy, your stake will be used to vote on whichever witnesses they vote for. If you do this, just make sure to periodically review your proxy to at least ensure that their votes are still aligned with your interests.
No vote too small
A lot of users with less stake often skip on witness voting because they think their vote doesn't matter. I know from experience that this is not the case. There have often been cases where a small amount of votes has made the difference between the 20 and 21 position. Also, every bit of stake that a backup witness has voting for them over the other backups increases the probability that they will receive more blocks.
Another reason is that your account is expected to grow over time. As you continue earn more stake (through participation in the network) your vote will be worth more.
Get out the vote!
If you have not voted for witnesses or reviewed your witness votes recently - I encourage you to do so now!
Two interfaces that allow you to vote for witnesses are:
There are also several other tools including programmatic APIs and cli_wallet if you are not comfortable trusting your keys to a third-party tool.
Vote for @timcliff :)
If you think the work I am doing is helping to secure the Hive blockchain and add value to Hive, I would appreciate your witness vote!
Thanks for reading!
I look forward to reading your replies in the comments :)