I very happily discovered that Steemit is democratically run today. So I click an article about the office of witnesses and this logo pops up saying that voting decides the future of Steemit, and all I end up thinking is, "Geeze, I hope voters are a lot better informed on Steemit than they are in real life." As a little steemit minnow, I've realized my place in Steemit very quickly. I can immediately see how decisions like, "who would make a good witness " are better left to people with more experience in the community. I've read a few articles, and there seems to be some consensus that the best Witness is likely someone with IT and coding experience. As an activist, my interest in this space is encouraged by the overlap of a cryptocurrency with the free exchange of ideas. For me, expanding access for the unbanked to online opportunities is a huge part of what makes cryptocurrency such an exciting monetary revolution. I want to encourage new people, like myself, to get educated about what makes Steemit work behind the scenes and vote for whoever they think will make the best witnesses.
My question to you is: Would a witness with a vision for strategic expansion be a good candidate for the office or are users the best promoters of Steemit and the witness position is best left to invisible architects who make our evangelism possible?
