I should have realized that my decision to mute @azircon based on his downvote campaign against @lucylin would be contentious. I thought it was the clear thing to do based on @azircon's behavior, but that's just my perspective and it is not so clear now.
I have realized that it was a poor decision that I made too quickly and without enough input from the community. I am not sure what the best plan of action is, but I have decided to unmute @azircon based on input from the community.
It seems that many users only care about rewards and price. While those things are important they are not the only factors in my decisions. The only thing that really matters to me is doing what is right.
I thought muting @azircon to protect @lucyling from an unwarranted downvote campaign was the right thing to do, but many community members disagree, and maybe @azircon deserves a chance. This community is much bigger than me and it seems the best thing to do is let this all play out and we will look at this again in the future.
Moving Forward
From now on, if there is a big decision like this, we will try to make it by stake weighted vote. Anyone can make a proposal for a decision that is to be made and put a "yes" comment and a "no" comment.
Proposal posts must be tagged with #pob-proposal and have a 100% beneficiary to @pob-fund to avoid spamming. A vote on one of the comments at any percentage, counts as a full stake weighted vote. More than 50% of stake must vote on "yes" or "no" to make the decision.