I use SteemWorld.org to check out the activities of witnesses. I want to know what their priorities are, whether they share the same ethics as I have and if they're using their wealth to either build up or crush new and smaller community members. I don't believe anyone should be down-voted for anything but criminal offenses - threatening, violence, trafficking - and for a whale or delegate to downvote with 100% vote power in response to a statement he disagrees with is unethical in my view. If he wants to teach a lesson, let him write a rebuttal like a thinking man, rather than use a heavy hammer to beat another into silence or submission...or leaving the platform. I also look at how well the nodes have been running. If they've been down for a high number of day, I am likely to withhold my vote, but may be lenient toward new witnesses, who still need time to get everything setup. There's a Witness Report for this somewhere. I didn't keep the link. Sorry about that. Then I check to see their involvement in community development projects. I don't take all community work at face value, some are actually more parasitic than helpful to the small and new members. Lastly, I watch THEM. They like to talk among themselves and when they do, they show their true colors. I pay attention. I've seen antagonism: for instance a witness of high rank left a comment on a 'fragile' member's page, asking if she forgot to take her medication. The statement wasn't made in response to anything said to him directly. The member he insulted flew into a rage and shortly had her account banned. Needless to say, I will not be voting for that witness. I don't vote for down-vote operators either. There's a mechanism in the ToS for addressing legitimate plagiarism complaints from copyright owners. Sending out the bots to punish people for failing to use the correct markup language is breaching the terms of service. Lastly any witness or member that thinks their wealth entitles them to a right to be cruel doesn't get my vote.