Why I think EOS is not a security? - The EOS

ICO was not a token sale at a fixed price. It was a Dutch auction model and the price paid was according to demand on each day. When you do a fixed price per token model, its almost assured to be a security because you are indeed expecting a return on your investment.
- At the time of purchase, B1 used a very impressive disclaimer section stipulating, we were not investing in anything. EOS was basically nothing, and we should not expect a return. That disclaimer alone, made many people worry and discouraged them from investing.
- EOS token of today, is not the token sold by B1 during ICO. EOS was launched 100% by the community and the community decided to respect the EOS (ERC-20) token snapshot.
- B1 has never been involved as a BP or operator of the network, where as many other networks start with the main team launching their chain and adding BPs afterwards. B1 and EOS are completely separated. There isn't any specific company controlling EOS that any government can sue and that is solely responsible for the current and future state of EOS. ENF and other community projects are elected and funded by the validators and funding can stop at any moment if the community wish to do so.
- The ICO money was not used to finance the development of the company/project.
- 90% of POS/DPOS L1 projects start as "shitcoins" as BTC maxis like to call them, because over 40% of the supply is owned and controlled by the founding teams and investors, hence they control the direction. B1 got access to barely 6% of the supply (from the initial 10%) and EOS didnt start with a foundation owning a huge chunk of the tokens. EOS is very much a community project / chain, similar to Bitcoin.
- B1 did not do much marketing of the token and never talks about price
- The minimum token price of EOS was near 0.50$ hence a minimal market cap of 500M$. It is not a low liquidity chain that had at some point a market cap of lets say 5M and provided the opportunity for investors to buy 20%+ of the supply for a very low amount of dollars. Who ever owns EOS has paid a lot for them and is not able to dump on the community at massive profits. All that to say, no entity owns a huge stake in the network without having put lots of $ into it.
- The EOS price never really mooned for a long period of time. We have been in a 5 year consolidation. We generally did not get a good return and is hard to say EOS was an investment for most so far.

Dude, we know it’s not

another reason why...B1 didn't exclusively focus on EOS support, which we all wanted. If they did what we wanted, the non-security classification of EOS would be threatened. For this point "There isn't any specific company controlling EOS that any government can sue and that is solely responsible for the current and future state of EOS." do you agree that if the ENF isn't careful with their actions, there could indeed be someone to sue?

Why did the code update stop for EOSIO Software? It is not EOS exclusive. And why did EOS intend to pay b1 if not for EOSIO updates ?

I'm not sure. If I had to guess it looks like a lot of the software upgrades were focused on enterprise, single node production. Which is what Bullish is using. So they probably needed to keep it under wraps to maintain Bullish's competitive edge for long enough to satisfy its shareholders, before making the code open source.

Why not say this openly months back ?

I think ENF are being careful with their actions, hence why things take time with Legal. ENF does not control EOS, the BPs do. If ENF dies (very unlikely), EOS will find ways to funds its development.

Something like I said - " Hey assholes, stop saying we are not developing EOSIO. We are developing a ton pf shit but it is all secretive " In a sensible way.

BP selection is a joke. Who is selecting BP , community? BS

I don't know...they are a private company.

ya what he said...clearly the top 21 are in cahoots. There is no "community" BP selection anymore. Your BP helped make that happen sadly.

How do you know this and not b1 exit scammed and return when it became a pain in their ass ?

Who ever owns and control the tokens. Its DPOS.

It is DPOS and also BS

No, Just whoever controls the token.

how do I know what, that if B1 focused too heavily on EOS it would risk the non-security classification? its kinda common sense I think. B1 always needed to be arms length from EOS otherwise it turns the ICO into a security offering.

No, How do you know they think like that ?

DPOS is no BS ETH2.0 is somewhat designed similar to DPOS. EOS had no downtime for 5 years. DPOS works well. EOS has been able to upgrade no problem. The people that are mad are the ones who dont have control. They can buy tokens or create a proxy if they want more governance power. DPOS doesnt give much voice to community plebs with no skin in the game or influence via proxy, as it should be.

DPOS gives power to assholes who have influence. Gotcha 🤝

classic fallback excuse...meanwhile only a mere 20% of EOS tokens in circulation are voting for the current top 21. And of those 20% they are concentrated in few few hands that sell the vote to a select few.

B1 have done many things poorly, we can all agree, one thing they did well however, was legal and compliance. So its not a stretch to recognize they very well knew what they were doing and what risks were acceptable to take...even though we as the community didn't like what we saw.

The BS part is to suggest EOS is some shining light of community engagement and collective decision making....bc DPoS makes it so 😂

still, token holders decide. Concentrated in a few hands?? Chris, EOS minimum market cap was 500M$ 1 Year ICO.... EOS did the best it could to distribute the tokens. If you think Telos or your other favorite chains are less concentrated, your acting dumb 😝

Dude, Their site was dead. Literally dead - outdated info, broken links all that stuff. Their developer program or what not sends me email saying the course will end in December long after it was supposed to be over. And what ? They were so busy developing Taurus they decided to not give an update. So b1 updating code when their ass is likely to be on fire is not looking like legal compliance.

The irony is they probably weren’t even updating code. If I had to bet, the majorly of the code we see in this new repository is years old - done by engineers who quit years ago.

EOS has a community. The community speaks in telegram, discord, etc. ENF and BPs are in all channels, they read ALL MESSAGES. BPs and ENF make decisions and take action on community feedback that is for sure. They just dont answer all messages directly but they are for sure, aware of all the community feedback.

Yes you can keep going back to the ICO as the justification of how decentralized EOS is, or you can look at who is TODAY voting for BPs. The chain is entirely controlled by very few, and EOS Nation is IMO one of the key players in establishing the current status quo we find ourselves in. ...and I'm acting dumb 🙄

Pretend it is token holders all you want. If EOS can remove proxy and the Top 21 now remains in Top 21 then let's talk holders. How many of the standby BP can produce blocks ? They still get paid for even if it is just a name AFAIK.

I think you're missing the point. I'm talking about B1 not directly engaging with EOS to help prevent EOS from becoming a security. What you're talking about is something different.

Over 21 of the standbys I imagine. You see most of them producing on other networks (like us).

Yes. I was talking about this.

There were hundreds of opportunities to help the EOS community without risking the security status

but its DPoS I thought you said...all of this chat is entirely irrelevant when the power brokers don't need to care we think or say here. They have the tokens necessary to maintain control, hence the status-quo that I often reference, and don't need to care about what we think. In its current state, EOS is captured by a small controlling few. Call it FUD if you want, it all onchain for us to see.

EOS is the best we have in that sense. Tokens on Telos and other chains are much more centralized. Thats a fact. I would not build DeFi or DID on these chains as much as i would on EOS.

perhaps...but at least the non-security status as so far held.

you facts are different than mine I guess. But again I get you're here as EOS Nation, who have clearly benefited from the current status quo...defend away :)

what you say is true to all blockchains and EOS is the best of them in that sense. Fewer entities control the other chains compared to EOS.

go get onchain data for all antelope chains, publish results here. Youll see 😜

are you kidding really...did you boss not explain to you ever how the votes are obtain, and how few power brokers there are here?

no,i dont think so, The controllers behind many nodes with less than 21 are actually Biance and Okx. They don't have to do anything. But you can get a high reward every day

ya lets, and while we're at it lets look at the number of sock puppets leaching inflation while good BPs like Sw/eden and NodeOne leave the chain.

your wasting my time, go work for once... or is your work to spread FUD here? EOS works well. DPOS works, the chain works, upgrades get pushed. Why are you even here seriously?

you are voluntarily participating, so if you feel that way you're wasting your own time. I'm here bc I don't agree with how your organization have worked to capture this chain. I'm not sorry if that hurts your feelings.

@ChrisBarnes1 If you know there is no use with all these talks why would you even bother ? Wouldn't your time be spent well on some other chains that have hope ?

Yes, there are some leeches - but there are also way more than enough BPs to keep the network operational that are running infrastructure. The question was “how many standbys are ready to produce blocks”, and the answer is “enough”.

are you in every chain telegram group that you dont agree with how they do things? go help improve the chains you care about. or actually do something that benefit EOS. Because I repeat, you are not helping EOS by acting like you do.

There's always hope.

But it's a serious waste. They're like moths.

lol...I'm not helping you acting like I do. EOS on the other hand needs a change...urgently, or we'll be priced out of existence. I'm a token holder, and I care. I'm also not at risk of biting any hand that feeds...which many in here are. So they don't speak up for fear of losing votes, losing funding, and loosing their contacts with those that are running things currently.

You need to know. If I can have enough to eat one hamburger, then I don't have to spend money on ten hamburgers, which is a serious waste. (and I don't have any money.)

I can’t disagree. The only thing I can point out is just that there’s 21 entities producing blocks now and most of the inflation for BPs is effectively going back to some token holders. That 1% to BPs for the most part isn’t used for improvements to the network, which is why I’m glad we have the 2% going to the ENF for that purpose instead. Not my ideal situation, but better than it was a couple years ago.