Attention to all Main Governance Jurors! Free TON Community prepared an investigation about your work🧑🏻💻
We all know that jury is a public duty🙋🏻♂️ Based on Analytics & Support Subgovernance contests, there was proposed the following table:
You can see full table 
here
Please, find your address and double check that your score is correct. If you agree/disagree with it, leave your comments in this table.
Deadline until end of this week 
Reserved for proposal!
If the jury does not vote, then it makes no sense and should be replaced
This spreadsheet is closed for comments.
My comments as judje:
Country Ambassadors for Free TON Stage 1 - My team members participated in this contest, I wasn’t allowed to vote.
TON OS DApp Server Devops Contest - I voted in this contest, but I abstained because my technical qualification does not give me the right to judge. I do not agree that the efficiency of the judge is zero in this case.
Atomic Swaps on Free TON - I voted in this contest, but I abstained because my technical qualification does not give me the right to judge. I do not agree that the efficiency of the judge is zero in this case.
Than you for feedback.Please assist with collecting another jurors feedback as well
What does “efficiency” mean in the table?
I don’t agree with the methodic.
For me the idea of having more jurors allow them to vote in contests where they have qualification. And thats why abstain is present in the UI.
And calculation efficiency that way how it is done in the table will lead only to increased number of spam votes just to “keep the rate”.
in my opinion this is one of the best proposals
The main problem, that there are a lot of jurors who didn’t vote or voted only twice since launch.
Hello,
I was taking part in the next contests so I could not vote:
#27 Slashing condition specification - Developers Contest
#42 Free TON Positioning Essay
Просмотрел все посты, не нашел ни одного Саши.
Видимо он имел ввиду тебя (Alex - Alexander), но ты Алексей)))
Невероятно похожи))))
Hello,
My team member taking part in the next contest so I could not vote:
#42 Free TON Positioning Essay (submission #1)
In view of the fact that many jurors have failed in their community-voting duties, this proposal proposes changing the composition of the Main Governance jury and eliminating inactive jurors from this table.
0:7b19105dd86d3301a4637c1f140afdfa15e1e648054935e99f6c00d79b327430
0:7dd2b7e0067f4beda7505ff0b9e2ae524e64acbb886dcab68db8c02b8d6115e0
0:557ac8018042f189cfe4ec996aaea2e0570e19f5ad90a1d967a18e3abef8093e
-1:1bf521942a93ed97f9f619fce34f5dbeda4eecd5b8507a2b64adab945bf4ed82
0:6833bb21a6cda873ed97ad97d86d47bb5938fe6cd22b46b0c53cad670143a1aa
0:23379b7c97026002872ecf13ba02b131a25eb67a060699aa2ab9bb644293a95a
After accepting this proposal, the following jurors lose the opportunity to vote in further Main Governance contests.
Jury removal table is based on Analytics & Support Subgovernance Jury Efficiency Contest
Will there be recruitment of new jury members for the vacancies?
No voting activity = disqualification. I support your proposal