Posted on

EOS Surges 15% after Dan Larimer’s Announcement of Future Announcements

EOS is a blockchain that has always raised the expectations
of users and investors. Its business strategy has proven to be fruitful not
only for software programming but also in terms of promotion.

Ever since its inception, EOS was recognized as a promising project. At the time it was the most lucrative ICO in the history of cryptocurrencies and had such a strong hype that it quickly arranged as one of the cryptos with the largest marketcap in the ecosystem.

Although enthusiasm declined with the bearish trend of 2018
and a course of negative propaganda accused the project of being overly
centralized, unreliable and even of not being a real blockchain, the team of
developers has remained active, coding and promoting its blockchain as one of
the best platforms for DApps.

On March 25, 2019, Dan Larimer, CEO of the EOS Foundation
gave a lesson of how serious his level of influence among traders is and how
vulnerable the community is to social phenomena such as FUD and FOMO. Less than
ten words were needed to generate a profound enthusiasm in public around an
ambiguous idea:

“June will be biggest news since EOSIO announcement”

The “announcement of an upcoming announcement”, of course, provoked a wave of questions and comments from many curious enthusiasts who wished to know what was happening, and what exactly they were working on. However, Mr. Larimer avoided any response that could provide more information.

screenshot courtesy of eoswriter
screenshot courtesy of eoswriter

After Larimer’s words, the EOS token started the most important bullish streak of the last three weeks, with a green candle disproportionate to the previous ones.

courtesy: Tradingview

The only track we could find of something that could happen in June is related to the event B1, however, from the fundamental point of view, it is unlikely that this is the reason for so much energy.

Perhaps, the team is excited by other events such as the launch of EOSFinex, some new wallet or DAPP, or even the favorable evolution that EOS has had in the FCAS ranking, which allowed it to position itself in the first place during the past week.

FCAS is a ranking based on Fundamental Analysis

The post EOS Surges 15% after Dan Larimer’s Announcement of Future Announcements appeared first on Ethereum World News.

Posted on

Fed Up and Forking: Rival EOS Blockchains Are Becoming a Reality

It can be hard to keep track of all the struggles and controversies surrounding EOS.

First came the stop-and-go launch, followed by controversy over locked accounts – then more locked accounts, this time on the orders of an “arbitrator” that many in the community hadn’t realized existed. Next came a fake order purporting to be from the arbitrator, the fallout from which led EOS architect Dan Larimer to propose a whole new governance structure or “constitution.”

Just one problem: there was and still is no system in place to vote on a constitutional change. Meanwhile the voting scheme that is in place – for choosing the block producers (BPs) who maintain the EOS blockchain much as bitcoin’s miners do – has put several BPs that aren’t following all the rules of the constitution in charge.

For some EOS community members, it was all too much.

Take Douglas Horn, who told CoinDesk:

“I’m a really big believer in the potential of EOS and of EOSIO software, and I came to believe that it was on a bad path.”

As such, Horn thought he could do better, and recently authored a white paper for Telos, a fork of the open-source protocol behind EOS called EOSIO.

And his is just one of several groups that have decided to take the software, tweak it and set up a new network.

EOS Force is another example. They propose an EOSIO-based main chain with side chains incorporating features of ethereum, zcash and cardano. Another is ONO, a social network that was going to launch on EOS, but decided to fork it instead. EvolutionOS, which aims for more even token distribution and lower RAM prices, is airdropping ethereum-based tokens and plans to launch its own EOSIO-based blockchain.

And other examples include WAX and Worbli.

Telos, though, appears to be the fork with the most momentum and support. For instance, several of its team members were involved in the EOS launch, and in more than one case, those people are helping build Telos while continuing to support the EOS network.

“We think the cross-pollination will benefit both Telos and EOS,” said a team working as on Telos and Dutch EOS on the mainnet.

According to Horn, Telos’ launch could come as soon as next month, with the aims to make two significant changes to the EOS that exists today: curtail the power of the largest token holders known as “whales” and launch with more solidified governance mechanisms that can be enforced directly on the blockchain.

Channeling Ahab

The first thing that stands out about Telos is the decision to cap the number of tokens any one address receives during the initial distribution at 40,000 (with certain exceptions).

The idea is to remove whales from the equation – primarily because on EOS, tokens equal votes, and right now, there’s a “hyperconcentration of voting power” in the hands of just a few, according to Horn.

According to the Telos white paper, 1.6 percent of EOS holders own 90 percent of the tokens. The largest holder by far, with 10 percent of the total supply, is Block.One, the company behind the EOSIO protocol. (Larimer is Block.One’s CTO).

Controversially, the company recently announced that it would use these tokens to participate in block producer votes going forward.

To reduce the influence of these heavyweights, Telos will distribute its TLOS tokens to EOS investors according to the original “snapshot,” but with one big difference: it will lop off any holdings above 40,000, a move that Horn said would affect just 0.63 percent of accounts.

Does that mean that “communist” Telos is going to “steal their coins,” as one Reddit user alleged?

Horn doesn’t think so, telling CoinDesk, that no tokens are being taken from larger holders to give to someone else, rather the project is giving EOS whales brand new TLOS tokens – albeit fewer of them than they might have gotten otherwise.

In this way, Horn expects Telos to eliminate the chance that token holders collude with BP candidates, who can currently earn the equivalent of thousands of dollars a day in EOS coins and might share those profits with the whales that elected them.

Telos isn’t alone in worrying about this phenomenon.

One Telegram user recently wrote: “I’m sick of seeing seven voters propping up puppet BP for rewards. I consider that type of manipulation stealing.”

Additionally, block producers that are elected based on a few whales’ votes sometimes fail to do their jobs. In a recent blog post, Ben Sigman, a cryptocurrency investor that’s written extensively about EOS, claimed that seven of the top 21 BPs weren’t complying with the rules, for example, by failing to maintain a public website or disclose ownership information.

The only exceptions to the token cap on Telos, however, are the Telos Foundation itself, which is being allocated six million tokens, and the founding participants, who will split another six million. Horn defended this decision, pointing out that these tokens are less than 2 percent of the total supply and saying Telos’ founders “are putting in a lot of effort and a lot of costs.”

Ready and on-chain

Telos’ other main priority, Horn said, is that, “Everything needs to be ready at launch.”

He said it was “crazy” for EOS to go live without “all the necessary pieces in place.” Citing the arbitration system specifically, Horn said many users were confused and surprised when a largely unknown body called “ECAF” began issuing orders in June.

Horn could also have mentioned the ability to vote in referendums, which is necessary to change the constitution, as Larimer has proposed doing. EOS Nation, a standby block producer, has begun testing a system for conducting referendums, according to a roadmap published in July, but EOS users still have no ability to propose or vote on protocol changes.

For Horn, it’s also important that all of these governance mechanisms, to the extent it’s technically possible, happen on the blockchain, rather than on Twitter or in Telegram groups, where misinformation – such as the fake arbitration order – can easily circulate. (It should be noted that ECAF has since improved its processes.)

“No, no! Everything’s going to be on-chain, who said off-chain?” Horn said, in response to a question about off-chain governance, adding: “On-chain, on-chain, on-chain, on-chain.”

Telos arbitrators, for example, will be elected in a similar manner to block producers. This wasn’t the case with the EOS launch, where arbitrators were selected through opaque off-chain processes.

And while Telos’ own constitution has not been finalized, Horn emphasized that “bullshit that’s unenforceable” won’t appear in it, such as the (original) EOS constitution’s provision that “Members shall not initiate violence or the threat of violence against another member.”

The constitution should look like “a contract or a software licensing agreement,” Horn said, not “something that Alexander Hamilton [would write].”

Finally, Telos aims to increase network reliability and security by automatically kicking unresponsive or noncompliant block producers out of the top 21 slots, without waiting for a human arbitrator to weigh in.

Meanwhile, standby block producers (the 30 immediately below the top 21) will periodically have to prove they’re ready to step in, or their pay will be dinged.

Healthy competition?

Despite his criticisms of EOS, Horn stressed that EOSIO is a “worthwhile” project, and acknowledged that he and others now building Telos were themselves involved in the EOS launch.

“We’re all part of this EOSIO community,” Horn said, adding:

“We’ve had the tremendous chance to look at what was done in EOS and say, ‘Hey, if we were to start over again, what would we do different?'”

Discounting the occasional accusation of theft or communism, the EOS community has been broadly accepting of Telos – and other forks – giving EOSIO another go.

“I think that competition is good for the ecosystem,” Daniel Keyes, from EOS Nation, a standby EOS BP, told CoinDesk.

A Reddit user echoed that sentiment, saying, “I welcome the chance to see how it plays out. Perhaps they will try out some things that work and all of us can become better for the experiment.”

Fork shadows image via Ursula Spaulding/Unsplash

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

Posted on

Block.One Is Taking a Bigger Role With EOS (And That's a Big Deal)

Block.One has decided to start voting with its hoard of EOS tokens.

Announced last week, the decision finds the startup that created the EOS software, now powered by the fifth most valuable cryptocurrency, breaking with precedent in a move that may have come as a surprise to those following the project’s decentralized launch.

That’s because since going live on June 14, the company has largely declined to exercise its influence over the code, preferring to encourage its users to unite, even in sometimes messy decision-making.

And there’s a good reason for that. For one, Block.One controls 10 percent of the 1 billion tokens set aside for developers prior to the network’s launch. Further, since decision-making on the platform corresponds to token holdings, the change could put the company in an extraordinarily powerful position, enabling them to decide who can determine truth on the ledger.

As of now, each wallet can vote to up to 30 candidates to serve as block producers, however, it’s worth noting that block producers with the most support on the network have less than 3 percent of the current token supply backing them.

This means that Block.One controls so many tokens, that the field of potential block producers could effectively narrow to the 30 it picked, if and when it decides to finally enter a vote.

It’s no surprise then, that the move has left some alarmed.

“I find it problematic that is now involved in selecting block producers, as it undermines their role as a neutral third party, and affords them a significant amount of influence over the network,” Arianna Simpson of Autonomous Partners told CoinDesk via email. (Simpson is not an investor in EOS.)

But others believe the decision is in line with necessity of innovation.

Christian Catalini of MIT’s Cryptoeconomics Lab argued that each new approach to crypto governance deserves a chance to be tested so the wider crypto world can benefit from its lessons, saying, “In general when you experiment you may land on solutions that may look appealing but don’t stand the test of time.”

That said, the EOS community has largely expressed excitement about the company taking an active role in governance.

On a Reddit thread about the news, this reaction was fairly representative:

“I have been waiting for this. I think this is a good thing, and will continue to align interests … If Block.One makes money, I will make money as well most likely.”

But intermixed with the positive reactions, there were also observations like this one:

“I think EOS will do great things, but this makes it Ripple 2.0. It’s essentially a blockchain that is owned and run by Block.One. I’m not even saying that’s a bad thing, but let’s not kid ourselves either.”

How voting works

By design, EOS only has 21 block producers. The small size allows them to come to consensus very quickly, which is why EOS supporters believe it can surpass the leading blockchains by overtaking it in transactions per second.

The EOS community elects these 21 block producers in a continuous election, which allows bad actors to be removed at any time. Each wallet can vote its tokens for up to 30 block producer candidates. The 21 organizations with the most votes get to do that work, for which they are rewarded with some of tokens emitted through inflation by the protocol.

One of the reasons it took EOS so long to finally activate was because the software wouldn’t go live until 15 percent of the total token supply had been staked for votes, but, as of this writing, roughly 30 percent of the tokens are staked for voting.

Block.One’s founder tokens gradually release over a 10-year period. Until then, all they can do is stake them for use of the network, including voting. They can only cast one ballot and since all their tokens are staked until they unlock, they have to vote all of them or none.

As one redditor who looked at the wallet balances in the genesis block reported, 99 percent of EOS token holders control less than 14 percent of the token supply. The top 1,000 wallets control 85 percent of the supply. So, it remains very much a network controlled by its richest users.

Block.One is the largest single holder. Joshua Kauffman, who leads governance and community efforts for one of the top block producers, EOS Canada, told CoinDesk that he believes Block.One, ironically, wants to exercise its vote to undermine other whales.

There’s a few block producers with very little support from small holders, he said, suggesting they are propped up by whale votes. Kauffman believes Block.One wants a chance to vote for the technically strongest candidates with the most community support in order to support the consensus of the most users.

“It’s in their best interest and the community’s best interest to insure the best possible producers are the ones running the network,” Kauffman said.

When it announced its intention to vote, Block.One also expressed support for a code change so that it can support 50 or more block producer candidates. That way, it’s more widely spreading around its big votes, allowing the community to make the final decision about who gets into the top 21.

It would take a minimum of two months for such a code change to go live, according to Kauffman, so if Block.One waits for that change to vote, it could still be a while

Big decisions ahead

Besides changing out block producers, EOS faces other big decisions going forward, and by taking part in block producer elections, Block.One could make its say over those decisions even more decisive.

First, EOS hasn’t yet passed a constitution to govern the protocol, so it doesn’t have official rules for how block producers should resolve conflicts, as we have previously reported.

To fix it, Block.One has proposed a completely new constitution. The new constitution is much more narrow in scope than the one developed by the community. The company is asking longtime supports to jettison all that work in favor of a narrow proposal.

Block.One cofounder and EOS creator Dan Larimer wrote in a Medium post:

“”I have seen that if you give people arbitrary power to resolve arbitrary disputes then everything becomes a dispute and the decisions made are arbitrary.”

Second, the worker proposal system is coming closer to fruition. That system will allow the community to vote on paying tokens generated by inflation to teams that want to build new products to make the whole protocol serve users better.

With time, decisions about these proposals could also be important in determining the direction the network takes.
Even if Block.One abstains from votes in both of these cases, block producers with its support are likely to follow its lead, and the supporters of those block producers are likely to follow them.

By expanding the number of block producer candidates it can vote for, it might also expand the number that feel inclined to follow the company’s lead.

“I agree that Block.One has an oversized voice,” Kauffman granted, but he also pointed out that the best way for Block.One to grow its wealth is by increasing token value. Disenfranchising rank-and-file users by controlling the process won’t achieve that, he argued.

“They want this to be the community chain,” he said.

EOS is experimenting in a space that blockchains haven’t adequately grappled with, Catalini said.

He and his collaborator Joshua Gans explained in a 2016 paper, this means that EOS has dramatically lowered the cost of verification, but it’s now facing another cost also described in that work, the cost of networking.

Blockchains don’t only need to come to consensus around the truth, they also need to find a way to coordinate economic activity around the world. That’s their networking cost, and “that’s the one that really changes market power and market structure,” Catalini said.

He added:

“That’s the one we don’t really have a governance structure for; that’s why you’re seeing so many false starts.”

Whale shark image via Shutterstock

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

Posted on

EOS Team Propose to Rewrite its Whole Constitution

EOS, one of today’s most promising blockchains, is going through a rather complicated process after its mainnet launch announcement.

The long-awaited bullish run has not happened, and a series of problems and disagreements have tarnished the birth process of this blockchain, casting doubt on its functionality, at least in the short term.

EOS logo

One of the most recent events that caused some annoyance among users was the order to freeze 7 EOS addresses. Similarly, other articles criticized the extreme level of centralization of the network.

However, there is little that the development team can unilaterally do, as the group behind EOS,, delivered the code to the community to give the network a higher level of transparency.

Despite this situation, on Thursday, the EOS team revealed on its official Telegram channel the proposal for a new Whitepaper “EOS.IO Technical White Paper v2“.

EOS Arbitration: Not The Best Implementation Right Now

The EOS team proposes to change the Whitepaper starting from the basics. One of the controversial aspects seeks to reduce the power of arbitrators over the decisions affecting the network:

“Bottom line … damage to community from ECAF is greater than funds we hope to restore to users … Arbitration should be limited to correction of intent of code… Freezing should be limited to code not function at intent.”

Dan Larimer

Such statements are a reference to the freezing of the addresses following a dispute over the theft of private keys.

A Blockchain’s Gotta Do What a Blochckchain’s Gotta Do

Shortly afterward, Dan Larimer, CTO of, published an article in which he talks about the importance of code as “law” in a blockchain, and how that should be the focal point for arbitrators.

He also mentioned that it was essential to consider the possibility of eliminating excessive arbitration to achieve greater objectivity in the blockchain and combat the possibility of mob-rule proliferation :

“Users of the EOS blockchain need some guarantees from the community in order to feel safe and secure. If everything on the blockchain is subject to mob-rule, then no one is safe. If the community does not have strong, objective, organizing principles, then everything is subject to interpretation and becomes unpredictable and arbitrary

Block One calls for an end to all arbitration orders other than to render non-binding opinions on the intent of the code.”

This post concluded with a proposal for a Constitutional Referendum with some very interesting suggestions, among them preventing block producers from freezing accounts.

Evidently, such proposals raised some questions around users. Some of which could not yet believe Larimer’s intentions to rewrite the whole constitution:

“Am I correct, in understanding you’re proposing removal of the entire current constitution, and replacing it with one that only refers to arbs being able to rule on code VS intent and code vulnerabilities / hacks like DAO?” a Telegram user asked

To which Larimer responded: “yes.”

The EOS community has not yet taken a clear direction on this proposal; however, the results of a possible adoption could be positive, at least at first sight.


Posted on

EOS Set to Amend its Constitution Barely Two Weeks After Mainnet Launch

In what continues to be one of the most eventful sagas in blockchain history, EOS is set to abolish its controversial constitution. This move comes barely two weeks after the launch of its mainnet.

A Do-over of the EOS Constitution

In a Reddit post by “SonataSystems,” screenshots from the EOS telegram chat show excerpts of a conversation between Dan Larimer and Simon Case. Larimer is the chief technology officer (CTO) of EOS. The discussion can be viewed in the image below.

The proposed changes seem to address many of the burning issues concerning the constitution. The new framework will cover only major blockchain problems like the type the DAO suffered after the hack. This new constitution on the face of it strips power away from the 21 block producers (BPs) who have been accused of monopolizing control of the blockchain. It also significantly limits the oversight responsibility of arbiters like the EOS Core Arbitration Board.

Critics have derided EOS for its apparent lack of decentralization with BPs holding far too much power. Also, many have criticised the need for a constitution or any human form of governance on a blockchain. They argue that one of the fundamental philosophies of blockchain technology is governance by computer code – which unlike humans, is always impartial.

The reaction to the proposed changes has been split between support and those who believe that the plan is yet another failure waiting to happen. A Redditor with the username “jjordan” remarked:

This is good news. The current interim constitution is far too long and leaves far too much open for (mis)interpretation. Short and sweet, if anything at all, is all the constitution we need, [sic] IMO.

Conversely, another Redditor with username “ifisch” expressed doubts about the plan, saying:

This won’t change anything. Block producers can still do whatever they want, and they’re the only ones bothering to vote anyway (with enough power to matter). The entire constitution concept is flawed and pointless.

EOS Ranked Highest by China

In a recent development, China released an updated blockchain ranking which put EOS right at the top, edging out Ethereum. According to the Chinese government, EOS excels in both technology and innovation. However, the blockchain didn’t score so well in the applicability metric. The previous blockchain ranking by China saw Ethereum in the number one position.

Regarding price movement, EOS is currently having a wretched June, down by about 50 percent from its month high of $15. The price has declined by almost seven percent within the last trading day. The much-touted project has suffered several setbacks stretching back to the pre-mainnet launch period. Recently, both the 21 BPs and the ECAF issued several freezing orders on accounts suspected of being involved in phishing scams during the mainnet launch.

Do you support the plan to amend the EOS constitution? What are your opinions on the presence of a constitution as part of blockchain governance? Keep the conversation going in the comment section below.

Image courtesy of Reddit and CoinMarketCap.


Posted on

EOS launches today 9 June 13:00 UTC after 100% of block producers vote to go live

EOS network to go live today as block producers line up for election

EOS is ready for take-off after 100% of block producers voted to launch the network. The mainnet goes live with EOSIO version 1.0.2 code at 13:00 UTC today.
The latest vote by EOS block producers, which took place this morning at 01:48 UTC, was streamed live, thanks to EOSGo, and can be viewed here. Community members had expressed concern about the lack of transparency of previous voting. More than 100 block producer representatives took part in the vote.

EOS is up 6% on the news at $14.67, according to coinmarketcap.

When the mainnet goes live then the serious business begins – voting for block producers.

Before voting can begin, EOS token holders will wait for a statement from block producers that it is safe to vote. Keep checking the official subreddit here or at EOSauthority.

Once the voting begins, for a chain to be enabled it has to have 15% of tokens in circulation staked to it and voting. It cannot be determined in advance how long this process might take. With EOS tokens very tightly held with, for example, just four mega whales – individuals or entities – holding 150 million tokens, which equates to 15% of total supply, the election may happen in relatively short order.

The hotly anticipated EOS launch follows a 12-month token sale that has raised $4 billion, making it the largest ICO to date.

Chain competition

EOS Mainnet Launch Group and EOS Core are two groups of block producers that are competing to garner support for their respective chains, although it looks like there may just be one chain at launch, which will make it more straightforward to get a chain up and running and less confusion for voters.

A number of portals have been set up to streamline the voting process, such as this one from EOSphere (initially showing testnet). You will need to download software called Scatter to be in position to start voting.

After a chain has reached the 15% token stake threshold it will be deemed to be valid and all normal functionality activated.

At this point the appointed block producers who have handled the process up until this point will relinquish control to elected block producers. The community of token holders will vote in a continuous process that will be updated every two minutes to elect 21 top “active” block producers who will be ultimately responsible for verifying blocks on the chain.

Once an EOSIO chain is live, EOS holders who have voted can unstake their tokens and put them to use on the network.

EOS has a 5% inflation rate and block producers are rewarded with 1% of that amount. The 21 “active” block producers receive a 0.25% pro rata block reward and the remaining block producers (together with the active BPs) earn a vote reward of 0.75%.

Staking and future token value

Developers who want to build decentralized apps (dapps) on the network must stake EOS tokens in order to secure network resource such as RAM and bandwidth, although there are no fees for transactions., the developer of EOS claim it can deliver enterprise scale transactions per second that could go into the millions. The chief technical officer at Dan Larimer already has two successful blockchain projects under his belt – Steemit and BitShares.

Developers have been building dapps to run on the platform prior to launch and two that have been closely watched are Everipedia, which has the backing of Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales and Iryo with its decentralized medical record storage solution.

Because of the staking system, app developers will have to tie-up tokens on the network. That should mean that in the event of dapps becoming popular more tokens will need to be staked on the network to secure the resource to keep dapps running efficiently. The effect of this should be to increase the value of outstanding tokens even after taking into account the 5% inflation rate.

Smart contracts cannot be created for three days after the block producers have been elected.

Posted on

Inside the Sprawling (Ongoing) Vote That Will Decide When EOS Launches

Almost one week after initiating, one of the largest, strangest experiments in global crypto governance hesitated as it neared its culmination.

While EOS, a new blockchain created by Block.One, which raised approximately $4 billion to build it, had effectively turned the code over to its users as of last Saturday, into Friday, the fruits of that effort suggest a lack of clear process is holding back progress.

At least two votes that could have ended with a version of the software launching actually took place (based on CoinDesk’s view of an unofficial stream of the decision-making process). Assembled here were candidates vying to become EOS “block producers,” or the entities able to claim the network’s rewards.

The first vote was deemed invalid, but it had enough votes for a “go.” The second was deemed valid, but it failed to meet the agreed upon threshold for launch.

Still, expectations are high for the next launch vote in the coming hours.

Here’s what we know:

  • All indications suggest its members are very likely to vote “Go” at the next meeting, which begins at 1:00 UTC.
  • That meeting should be livestreamed on EOS GO’s YouTube channel, according to EOS New York.
  • EMLG holds a “Go / No Go” vote at a meeting that happens every 24 hours. The vote to go has to reach a threshold of two-thirds-plus-one of validator candidate organizations present. When a “go” vote happens, the network should go live in approximately 12 hours.

The chain will be declared active after 15 percent of token holdings have been voted to establish the first set of 21 block producers.

Changes on the ground

As profiled by CoinDesk, one of the unanswered questions surrounding the project was just how EOS block producers would be chosen and what influence they would have on the process. Already, this has reared itself in surprising ways (with groups jockeying for bigger roles).

The organization leading that launch is the EOS Mainnet Launch Group (EMLG), a coalition of groups who have set themselves up to be block producers.

Once live, EOS holders will vote on which candidates get a spot as a block producer. There will be 21 block producers, and they will be paid out through inflation in EOS tokens (much like bitcoin’s miners). But, there may be as many as 200 groups vying for one of those spots.

So, even if the idea competing softwares could be created has been ruled out, there’s still a decent amount of unrest amongst those still unsure of their post-launch positioning.

For example, a validator candidate out of Hong Kong posted an update of the call on Twitter last night, which shows some of the other issues discussed before the vote.

In the EOS New York Telegram channel, after the vote, a leader in the group, Kevin Rose, wrote the following:

Here is what happened: the voting process was an absolute mess. We need to create a process. Beyond that, Dan [Larimer] introduced doubt when he questioned going live without EOSIO 1.0.2 being released.
Because the voting was a mess, we don’t understand what the reasons for no go were.

The EMLG held a check-in meeting this morning as it prepared voting for tonight’s meeting.

Voting trouble

But while who will be who in this post-EOS world isn’t clear, we do have a lot of information about the voting process. Last night’s meeting, one of many held over the last week to unite potential global users, lasted roughly three hours.

CoinDesk was watching live through the last hour or so, as the first vote was tallied and the second vote happened amidst discussion. Discussion and voting were never separated, with some participants still asking clarifying questions while the vote took place. As Rose suggested above, there was no clear, pre-established process for verifying that each person who voted was actually a candidate validator nor to make sure that each candidate organization only voted once.

Consensus on the call held that the first vote, to go, was not valid due to confusion by participants. One challenge facing the group is that all votes have to be translated for candidates in non-English speaking areas.

A subset of participants committed to create a sign-in based voting system within the livestream platform they were using, in order to ensure that voting would be straightforward, each organization could only vote once and no non-block producer candidates voted.

New EOS Update

Information was also discernible about the role of the company behind EOS.

While Block.One committed to a diminished role in the EOS launch, and to refrain from voting on proceedings with its tokens, founder and CTO Dan Larimer showed up on the EMLG call to answer questions.

He noted Block.One plans to publish an update very soon, bringing the EOS software to version 1.0.2. This was described as a soft update, dealing with issues such as bugs in the whitelist and blacklists for smart contracts. Multiple block producers said that soft updates have no impact on the protocol in production and in fact it wouldn’t matter if some ran on 1.0.1 and others ran on 1.0.2.

But the announcement appeared to engender uncertainty, which Rose confirmed multiple times on EOS NY’s Telegram channel.

In a statement also shared on that channel, a block producer candidate wrote it had voted “no go” because its team had found errors with account creation and transfer finality. CoinDesk was not able to authentic these statements.

One group within the EMLG has expressed caution throughout, and the block producer candidate out of Hong Kong, HKEOS, was one of its first members. That group’s Twitter feed affirmed its “no go” vote last night, writing:

“This is short term pain, for long term gain.”

Egg hatchery via Shutterstock.

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.