Remove: data443.com

[dangell7]

Justification for removal of data443.com

• Absent from community
• Absent from voting on amendments
• Absent from voting on fees (still on 10 XRP without justification of why)

In my opinion data443.com has not been a good community validator. While they have been reliable as far as uptime, they are almost completely absent from voting and this imo is more important than spinning up a server on aws. I also believe anyone who is still on the old fees without providing justification to why is actionable intelligence for review and removal. It tells me they are lazy and cannot be bothered to make one simple adjustment.

[mvadari]

Note: tequ's validator is not located in Japan, so I would say the last point doesn't count

[jonaagenilsen]

Where IS tequ's validator located? Will it add to the diversity of the UNL?

[mvadari]

Where IS tequ's validator located? Will it add to the diversity of the UNL?

cc @tequdev

[mankins]

@dangell7 can you remove tequ's addition from this PR? Ideally we'd do these as independent items. I see that #4 has already taken care of that part.

[dangell7]

Ok it is my understand that a voting group should never be an even number. So as long as the Foundation is keeping track of that.

[mvadari]

PR title/description should be updated accordingly too

[pkcs8]

I endorse this change.

[rickyowens]

Has not been validating for 24hrs now, no communication, history of not voting, I support this.

[danielwwf]

I second this change