Steemit founder and EOS CTO Dan Larimer wants to replace the EOS constitution. Larimer initially suggested removal and replacement of the EOS constitution, June 27th via EOS telegram chat. On June 28th Larimer wrote a Medium post outlining the current difficulties facing the platform.
“We have seen that if you give people arbitrary power to resolve arbitrary disputes then everything becomes a dispute and the decisions made are arbitrary. The more power the arbiter has, the more vicious and petty the disputes become and the less predictable the outcome.”
EOS Constitution Crisis
EOS has endured a fair share of negative publicity in recent months, and it shows no sign of abating. EOS is a platform for the development of decentralized applications (DAPPS) much like Ethereum. It is governed by a constitution which indicates that disputes are to be referred to an arbitrator, the EOS Core Arbitration Forum (ECAF).
ECAF has been freezing user accounts without due process. Some have applauded their actions which have frozen the accounts of known scammers, but the majority are very dissatisfied with a governance model that is not decentralized in any substantial measure. It sets a terrible precedent where a central authority freezes accounts, stating “reasoning to follow at a later date.”
Amid much confusion about the authority of ECAF, EOS New York have decided to ignore ECAF. This is a huge split in the community as a large block producer is now ignoring the power conferred on ECAF by the constitution. EOS is in a constitutional crisis, and the price has plummeted amid the chaos.
How to Replace the EOS Constitution
The issue is not that the governance model isn’t well thought out, though this is also true. The issue is that a governance model exists. With Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, you lose your coins, and they are gone. It is seen as the price to pay for pure ownership. The network is either decentralized, or it is not. EOS seem to have taken a different route. But even if it is successful in preventing scammers, it fails the decentralization test. It is just digital money ruled by a particular group. However, Larimer’s proposals rectify this by putting the decision in the hands of the token holder.
Larimer, as head of Block One, proposes an EOS constitution referendum, where the intent of code is law and at no time would elected block producers freeze or modify contracts that are “operating as intended”. The EOS constitution could be amended by a vote of no less than 15%. And the token holder can choose to opt into a new smart contract where the block producers and ECAF are involved in the arbitration system. Meaning if funds are stolen, and the token holders have evidence, ECAF can order the block producers to freeze the associated accounts, once they have opted in.
Things move rapidly in the blockchain ecosystem. Blockchain networks are quickly expanding, securing political, technological and business partnerships. EOS is experiencing a governance crisis before it has even got started, its main network only recently being launched. This is particularly relevant given it raised $4 billion in its ICO. Cohesion and solidarity are badly needed within the EOS community. Tron and Cardano could easily capitalize on the EOS fragmentation, as could other cryptocurrencies.
Digital Nomad with an interest in Zen and Blockchain technology.
Law graduate with 3 years experience as a consultant in the capital markets industry and 4 years experience freelancing on UpWork as a Creative Writer.