Does Accusations of Buying Votes True in the Case of EOS Block Curators?

The whistle blower of Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin is pinpointing EOS with its facts and figures which are in question in the current crypto market. Here, comes the question of 5 billion dollars at stake.

Huobi, an exchange based in China has come up in news with a leak of data which directly targets EOS block creation participants on a whole. EOS mainly has 21 block supporters who store block baggage in return of cryptocurrencies.

Huobi has strictly denied this fault as non-existing. Truth is unclear!

Apart from this commotion, the functions of participating block builders have come up in forefront. Their smart tactics of buying votes has to keep in check!. Further keeping with their view, certain block creators says, “We support protocols to keep them thriving, so, in return, we back other creators with our earned tokens. What possible harm it can prove?”.

EOS Structure in Upheaval

EOS is somewhat careless or simply put indecisive in its functional matters. The respective 21 block curators have full authority to halt accounts reporting mischievous tactics.

Vitalik again criticised EOS system through a Medium post highlighting about the protocol’s restraints on voting. Apart from that, its wallet working is in question as well! Users have a say in the voting of the block producers but all in a hustle and tussle.

Here is this one characteristics where token holders can make a vote but the unbiasedness is in question.

Failure in Governance

A specific exchange platform allows its EOS holders a gateway to vote independently.

Main drawback for EOS wallets is its anonymity of identity by which no one can know who is getting and by whom!

In this string, Huobi has been put to doubt. Some big heads are stating that the tactic of ‘vote buying’ has sprouted before the EOS existence. Here is this talk that, “A voter isn’t concerned about whom he/she might be voting but eye on the bribe in the face of earned tokens”.

Users generally vote those block producers who participate with them in the public front. That’s the reason behind the neglect of China’s block creators on the whole.

There is malice in the block curator’s agreement which states that it’s any candidate can disqualify any member who is the owner of higher than 10{1ed322b4ebc6308a96bb56cc7475f77571852bbc6f0604419d43be8394333a92} in the company.

What has left for the EOS ecosystem to do besides forking its defining protocol?

Even if we say that Huobi isn’t into buying any vote now, but we can’t say this about other block producer strings! So, there is dire need to keep a time check on the regulations of the other block curators. To keep EOS decentralized community from breaking into pieces, it has to put forward its brighter side among the audience who can largely benefit from it.

For this each 21 participants have to put restraint on their visionary motives and come clean among the public.

Join our Telegram Channel : @Cryptoknowmics

for regular updates and important announcements about Cryptoknowmics or to be a part of our Telegram Group : @cryptoknowmic discussions, query and any suggestion.

**Views expressed here are open to research and analysis from the reader’s side**