Correction: I made a mistake in this one, probably from rushing a bit to keep on top of the current volume of proposals. The proposal sets rewardable_nodes for this node operator to 27, not 14. From the file I created on 28 Feb using the decentralization tool, I see that there were only 26 nodes attached to this node operator at the time, as pointed out by @LaCosta . I might have voted to reject the proposal if I had not overlooked this, but as explained above by @GiantLeaf this issue has now been rectified. I verified with the same tool that this node operator now has 27 nodes, so at this point I have no objection to adopting the proposal.
2 Likes