It’s not about block one…it’s the message the network is sending that’s highly problematic
The message is up to the community to shape, if we let Consensys decide what that message it, then that's our own fault. Whatever is decided will be the decision of 15/21 BPs ruling on intent of code is law. It's not emotional. It's a decision based on interpreted facts.
EOS is not truly democratic yet
The message that it sent a few months back, where it changed 100's of accounts keys to enforce "intent of code is law"? This is the same situation.
No it’s not, and you know that
If anyone is wondering how effed the EOS brand is, think about how that happened and not even coindesk wrote about it.
I'm not sure, I haven't decided. It's pretty black and white that the actions from the vault hack were because "tokens were taken that weren't meant to be by the intent of the contract", and this situation is the same in that "these tokens are being taken but not for the intent they were given".
Aaron, what language do you have to show B1 has failed to meet a condition?
I enjoy good debates, which is why I'm active on this topic 😇
the hack is a different story, those were stolen keys from users accounts
This is a world without legal repercussions of bad inter-user actions. It’s the Wild West, self policing. You can’t go after people easily. So what the network did was show that it’s at the whims of a few humans at the top.
Me as well Aaron. And I appreciate your willingness to engage, even though I disagree with you
Being able to debate while remaining civil and respectful is definitely something I'd love to see more around here, without the pitchforks 🙏
That's where the whole situation gets screwy, there were no predefined conditions to that stake, except the conversations and promises made around the time of the genesis of the blockchain. I was there and witnessed those conversations, and my impression during those times was that B1 was given 10% of the token supply to continue to deliver public goods for use in EOS/EOSIO. That effort largely stopped earlier this year when the vast majority of the B1 team quit/was fired/whatever happened, and all resources of B1 were moved to non-public goods such as Bullish/Voice.
The terms of b1 stake was community-defined
Isn't that B1s fault now? We've been at a legal loss with them outside of blockchain world, now they're in ours with our judges, and we know what they said.
I don’t support mob justice. I just want to say the truth and then move on
It's not. We're not going to do anything. The majority of the blockchain will decide which is how DPOS works along with intent of code is law.
You say this, but there are more active EOSIO chains that operate with far greater god mode powers than EOS 😅 I think this is a red herring.
Yes because their communities don't run on emotions
Обсуждают сегодня