Please all try to refrain from ad hominem attack. It doesn’t really foster constructive discussion.
That said, rather than arguing about the current implementation it would be better to discussed the planned implementation as outlined in the design document I linked to earlier. In fact that document was posted to collect feedback from the community so I’m sure insightful comments are more than welcome.
The Storj team is already well aware of flaws in the current implementation, which is why a rework is in the works and why disqualification/pausing based on downtime is currently on hold. Instead of arguing about the past, focus your arguments on the future implementation so that they help make things better.