We all want to elect the best possible NN operators, I think that's a given. The task is how best to compare different candidates. Some assume candidates buying VOTES would be more likely to run less reliable notaries, although I don't conclude that myself, and don't see the logic of that proposition. A determined candidate wants to win a place, and securing support by sharing revenue can help do that, but it doesn't follow that this guy would be more unreliable or dishonest just because he is determined to win, and is prepared to take a smaller return for himself to do so. Actually, I see the opposite, a guy who takes a smaller profit to secure a NN is thinking long term, and a guy who says vote for me and I will do some good projects might be saying anything just to get elected, and might run a terrible node. People can say one thing and not do it (some did last time), but a candidate who offers profit sharing for VOTES can't easily back away from that, else have their rep trashed publicly.

It's easy to use community rep and past performance to judge candidates running a second time or to get additional nodes, but for new entrants making promises about future projects and undertakings that will benefit KMD etc, I am less convinced, and guys can promise one thing and deliver a lot less or it turns out their projects mostly benefit themselves.

What I want to know is do candidates have to declare if they're paying someone else to run their node, are all current candidates running their own nodes now, or are some still hiring guys like badass? That turns me off much more than a tech guy sharing profits for votes, unless that person does some amazing work for komodo. Hiring a node operator only makes sense for community pools.