EOS Mainnet Launch Plagued by Organisational Concerns

EOS Mainnet Launch Plagued by Organisational Concerns

After much deliberation, the votes were counted and, as expected, the EOS block producers/validators chose ‘Go’ to take the mainnet live on Saturday, June 9.

After raising around $4 billion in a year long ICO organised by Block.One, the experimental distributed proof-of-stake (DPOS) blockchain was turned over to the community to decide on what was to come next.

The ‘Go’ decision had followed several days of delay where over a hundred entities, who are staking a claim to become one of the block producers on the network, loosely aligned with each other to form the EOS Mainnet Launch Group (EMLG) and facilitate the vote streamed live on Youtube by EOS GO.

What is Happening Now?

However, concerns have surfaced in relation to the limited structure of the validators and of the vulnerability of the EOS code – which is currently being tested in a large Hong Kong-based hackathon

With just 21 block producers required, an alliance between eleven of these would be enough to effectively take control the blockchain. 

The risk itself was highlighted in article from Weiss Ratings – the only ratings agency to date to provide risk assessment ratings on crypto-backed assets. Entitled “We Still Love EOS But its Centralization is a Case of Bad Breadth” and written by Juan M.Villaverde, the piece points out the narrow range of block producers that could possibly allow a small group to hold governance within the blockchain.

Villaverde’s piece espouses high hopes for the new blockchain but believes that, without addressing this key issue, it can not achieve its stated goal of being truly decentralised. 

Now the network has been established, token holders are being asked to vote for who they want to be the actual block producers. While this should have been a relatively straightforward process, the reality has been that it has added fuel to the centralised controversy because only one anonymous block producer will run the voting procedure instead of the 21 originally stated.

And whilst there is no way to verify the independence of the appointed block producer, the issue is compounded with further dissatisfaction amongst EOS token holders concerning the mechanics of voting.

There is no official Block.One voting portal but there are others appearing online and it has become difficult for users to establish if they are authentic or phishing sites. The situation has given rise to numerous angry posts on the Reddit platform over the last few hours.

Ultimately, these Reddit posters came up with 3 possible solutions of their own.

As it is assumed a significant proportion of holders of any token are primarily concerned with price growth rather than specific project intentions, and given the centralised vote supervision and uncertainty surrounding valid portals the voting turnout is likely to be lower than originally expected.

The question remains whether this lax organisation is the result of the usual birthing pains of a new blockchain or the visible symptoms of a systemic failing.