## Proposed Changes
While investigating an incorrect head + target vote for the epoch boundary block 708544, I noticed that the state advance failed to prime the proposer cache, as per these logs:
```
Mar 09 21:42:47.448 DEBG Subscribing to subnet target_slot: 708544, subnet: Y, service: attestation_service
Mar 09 21:49:08.063 DEBG Advanced head state one slot current_slot: 708543, state_slot: 708544, head_root: 0xaf5e69de09f384ee3b4fb501458b7000c53bb6758a48817894ec3d2b030e3e6f, service: state_advance
Mar 09 21:49:08.063 DEBG Completed state advance initial_slot: 708543, advanced_slot: 708544, head_root: 0xaf5e69de09f384ee3b4fb501458b7000c53bb6758a48817894ec3d2b030e3e6f, service: state_advance
Mar 09 21:49:14.787 DEBG Proposer shuffling cache miss block_slot: 708544, block_root: 0x9b14bf68667ab1d9c35e6fd2c95ff5d609aa9e8cf08e0071988ae4aa00b9f9fe, parent_slot: 708543, parent_root: 0xaf5e69de09f384ee3b4fb501458b7000c53bb6758a48817894ec3d2b030e3e6f, service: beacon
Mar 09 21:49:14.800 DEBG Successfully processed gossip block root: 0x9b14bf68667ab1d9c35e6fd2c95ff5d609aa9e8cf08e0071988ae4aa00b9f9fe, slot: 708544, graffiti: , service: beacon
Mar 09 21:49:14.800 INFO New block received hash: 0x9b14…f9fe, slot: 708544
Mar 09 21:49:14.984 DEBG Head beacon block slot: 708544, root: 0x9b14…f9fe, finalized_epoch: 22140, finalized_root: 0x28ec…29a7, justified_epoch: 22141, justified_root: 0x59db…e451, service: beacon
Mar 09 21:49:15.055 INFO Unaggregated attestation validator: XXXXX, src: api, slot: 708544, epoch: 22142, delay_ms: 53, index: Y, head: 0xaf5e69de09f384ee3b4fb501458b7000c53bb6758a48817894ec3d2b030e3e6f, service: val_mon
Mar 09 21:49:17.001 DEBG Slot timer sync_state: Synced, current_slot: 708544, head_slot: 708544, head_block: 0x9b14…f9fe, finalized_epoch: 22140, finalized_root: 0x28ec…29a7, peers: 55, service: slot_notifier
```
The reason for this is that the condition was backwards, so that whole block of code was unreachable.
Looking at the attestations for the block included in the block after, we can see that lots of validators missed it. Some of them may be Lighthouse v1.1.1-v1.2.0-rc.0, but it's probable that they would have missed even with the proposer cache primed, given how late the block 708544 arrived (the cache miss occurred 3.787s after the slot start): https://beaconcha.in/block/708545#attestations
770a2ca030