EOS Proves That Decentralization Isn’t Its Priority Yet Again

Blockchain protocol EOS recently became associated with a new scandal as its governance model was exposed. This came to light when evidence showing that some verified transactions on the network were reversed surfaced on Reddit. The digital asset community haven’t been encouraged by the company’s governance model that excludes decentralization.

With the co-founder of the Blockchain protocol, Daniel Larimer insisting that decentralization isn’t the network’s top priority rather the company’s stance regarding robustness against being shut down and anti-censorship has been given more attention.

EOS Reverses Already-confirmed Transactions

A screenshot showing a ECAF moderator reversing already completed transactions on the network was revealed by a reddit user on November. The post received hundreds of comments. Reddit user auti9003 posted the screenshot that indicated that an arbitrator with EOS, Ben Gates chose to reverse the transactions without the permission of users, which led to outrage among users with many individuals. He claimed EOS has failed to prove itself amidst a host of other centralized networks.Most digital asset networks usually depend on a hard fork for such an action to take place, but the flexibility that EOS offers makes it different.

EOS Price Today – EOS / USD

Name Price24H (%)
EOS (EOS)
$1.82
-5.67%

Is EOS Looking at Decentralization?

EOS’ governance model has drawn controversy before. In early October, allegations came to light about the platform’s lock Producers (BPs), including Chinese exchange Huobi, of collusion and mutual voting. A leaked Huobi spreadsheet suggested that the primary EOS nodes part of mutual voting with pay-offs to retain control and keep their profits.

Afterwards, Block.one, the digital asset developer for EOS, revealed that it was “aware of several unverified claims relating to irregular block producer voting, as well as the subsequent denials of the claims.”

Further, in June this year, a bigger scandal occurred. This occurred when EOS BPs overrode the ECAF decision and closed seven accounts in relation to phishing scams after the arbitration body failed to respond promptly. The ECAF later ordered the accounts frozen, but this decision caused many supporters to question EOS’ decentralized system, while others labeled the move as an abuse of ‘power.’

Days after, another ECAF order that users should stop processing transactions that involve 27 more addresses surfaced. This attracted more outrage from the crypto space. One user called it a fake ECAF order and began to circulate it on social media sever days after.

While some BPs, notably that of EOS New York, revealed that they will suspend execution of such orders, because they couldn’t determine if they’re legitimate. Yet again, ECAF’s and BPs struggled to move swiftly regarding coordinating their actions, and many decisions on EOS were taken care of by centralized entities.

More Criticism For the Network

More detailed and grounded criticsm of EOS began this November 1. The EOS’ governance model just arrived. Whiteblock a Blockchain testing company shows from a host of findings. Whiteblock’s first independent benchmark testing of EOS revealed a lot about the network. The research found that the EOS foundation is designed on a flawed model that isn’t truly decentralized.

Despite this development, Daniel Larimer, the chief technology officer at EOS confirms that his network is not looking at decentralization. Nevertheless, Larimer also added that the project is still more decentralized than Ether and Bitcoin. This is because 11 BPs are needed to control the most of wEOS network, while ETH and BTC relied heavily on 4 and 3 respectively.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.