EOS developer Block.one just lately responded to claims of suspicious voting actions amongst block producers (BPs). Final week, reviews emerged that Huobi and different BPs had been colluding to control votes within the community.
Decentralization Means BPs Voting Collectively?
Brendan Blumer, the CEO of Block.one, responded to the allegations in a weblog put up printed on Monday, saying:
We’re conscious of some unverified claims concerning irregular block producer voting, and the following denials of these claims. We consider it is very important guarantee a free and democratic election course of inside EOS and should, as we deem applicable, vote with different holders to strengthen the integrity of this course of.
In impact, to guard EOS’ decentralization drive, the foremost BPs can interact in collaborative voting. Such a state of affairs seems anathema to the thought of decentralization — particularly when paired with EOS’ coin holder voting framework.
Blumer in his put up seems to current democratic governance as a path to decentralization. Nonetheless, given the EOS present voting framework, such an expectation appears unreasonable.
Commenting on this identical challenge, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin opined that EOS’ voting protocol would inevitably result in widespread ‘quid professional quo voting.’ As soon as this occurs, there’s little stopping the emergence of ‘voting cartels’ driving the community collective in direction of the actualization of the targets of a choose portion of the system.
No matter these observations, Blumer seems assured that the method would yield outcomes, saying:
As we go ahead and proceed to enhance the EOSIO open supply code, we extensively take into consideration the way forward for decentralized governance and are dedicated to repeatedly pushing thought management on optimum design.