“Are you still on that call?”
“Yes , shouldn’t be too much longer…”
“But it’s Father’s Day…”
I was hosting the call, couldn’t drop off.
It was important!
A day or so before, we were on another call with the BPs working on the EOS 911 rescue approach. We invited Bitfinex to the call as we knew they were setting up to unlock the Mainnet very soon.
Time was running out.
Once we explained the status of our work in order to save accounts, the Bitfinex team immediately agreed to hold off to allow that work to finish.
Now on Father’s Day, a routine BP call would turn into a marathon session as ECAF were unsure whether they could issue an order to freeze the accounts for the people for whom they’d been working for over a week to verify.
The 21 active BPs needed to make a unanimous decision to review the evidence and initiate a blacklist for the accounts to ensure they wouldn’t lose funds.
I was convinced then and still am today that this was the correct course of action. I have read every thread and opinion about what is wrong with that approach, that DPOS shouldn’t work like this and a tonne of other legacy arguments.
But EOS is something new, a governed blockchain with a constitution which all BPs had just signed up to when we registered as block producers. Our supporters also signed when they cast votes.
The mantra of protecting life, liberty and property — and a path to justice when things were wrong — is what attracted me to this project. It still does. On Father’s Day, we had the chance to start as we meant to go on, to forge a new path, to do things another way.
I have been honest and vocal about my disappointment in ECAF on the Father’s Day call and soon after. They were professional but overcautious, the lack of an order at that time left a vacuum, which has yet to be filled and has opened the FUD gates to a vocal minority to push their agenda.
Our position is clear on this.
Block producers are bound by the EOS constitution; they should have all read it and are obliged to uphold their commitment to execute processes in accordance with it. Should they disagree, we may ask them to resign as a Mainnet BP until we have a referendum, at which time they can choose to support or not whatever referendum is ratified at that time.
There are many standby BPs waiting to serve under our current constitution.
We are one of them!
One of the criticisms that is thrown at ECAF is that it is centralised and unelected. And while that may be factually correct at this point in time, it is unfair and unnecessary.
The people in ECAF have been working on the EOS project for many months, debating how best things should be structured to ensure adequate checks and balances. I personally nominated some to be interim members of ECAF.
ECAF can be the seed for a decentralised arbitration framework designed to support multiple EOS networks. If successful, it will be more revolutionary than the software we are running. Proper governance and smart contract arbitration is the bridge between where we are now and where we need to go. It’s what is required for mainstream adoption and for the value of our EOS investments to reach their true potential.
But these things take time, patience and hard work.
We need ECAF need to step up to engage with the community of both token holders and block producers.
They are not a Supreme Court, or any type of court for that matter. They are just a small team tasked with the thankless job to build out one pillar of this project. Because this is new, there is no handbook, rules or processes. That is a challenge and an opportunity.
We need to give them the space and time to take the baby steps needed, and we believe this work needs to happen regardless of what changes in governance comes later.
Blockchain has been around for a decade; arbitration for centuries. Right and wrong forever.
Let’s push for a fully supported ECAF with an extra shot. Anything less is as pointless as crappy decaf.
It’s not too late, yet.
