New Traits With this proposal we pretend to add 7 more traits and respective filters that are currently missing and we feel that are very important to the decision process selection:

APY/APR - based on the average era points received -Slashing - was the validator slashed in the past -Average Grandpa Votes - number of grandpa votes -Average Authored blocks - number of authored blocks -Commission Changed - has commission changed -Unclaimed Eras - number of eras with staking rewards unclaimed -1KV Participant - is the validator a valid participant in 1KV

The commission change is a real pain point for nominators, especially because they currently have no way to monitor it at a glance, without tediously clicking around Polkadot-JS Apps Staking tab. This would be an EXCELLENT addition. :)

I would also suggest adding another filter: "Bond withdrawal"- has the validator's stash balance decreased over the past 28 eras? Why? Because validators who remove KSM from their own stake after being elected have less skin in the game than nominators thought when they initially nominated them. Stash withdrawals also indirectly encourage validators to run as many nodes as possible with minimal own stake. This practice not only harms real decentralisation, but it also discourages new/1KV that are left to "queue" for ages.

Ps: If I have misunderstood some of the staking election processes, please feel free to "update" me. Thanks! :)

Ps2: Also, Leaderboard Subscription is the missing piece that all nominators desperately need. Thank you for proposing such a ground-breaking feature! <3

Hi @anaelleltd thank you for your feedback.

I think your observation for a new trait called Bond withdrawal - has the validator's stash balance decreased over the past 28 eras? is spot on and makes perfect sense. It's a metric that is hard for a Nominator to track down and i don't see implemented anywhere else. So definitely a very nice addition to our traits list.

I'll make sure we accommodate this new trait in the current proposal 👌

I am really in favour of such a tool. Particularly, I think it is very important for you not to make a decision for the nominator ("hey, here's the best 16, trust me"), but allow them to tweak certain parameters themselves. Each parameter should ideally be explained at the same page.

That being said, you could also propose your own set of "default criteria" that the user can chose from.

Hi @kianenigma many thanks for the feedback.

Agree 100%.

We currently have an info icon button near each respective weight slider, with a short explanation of each trait. Perhaps we can make the explanation even more explicit and visible by showing it all the time when the user is adjusting the weight value. And/Or have a dedicated page with a detailed explanation of all traits.

Regarding the "default criteria", this is something that needs improvement for sure. We definitely do not want the users of the app to take the default settings by granted, and just use that. We want the users to feel empower and responsible so that they choose their own weight values based on what they matter most.

Here perhaps we could start by presenting some kind of nice user journey where we collect from the user the weight and filter values (showing a full description of each trait along the way) before reaching the interactive board and respective leaderboard. Later if the user decides to use the subscription feature, it will then just be a single button click, since all traits have already been chosen and customised by the token holder.