EOS Alliance Issues Official Statement on the New Vote Buying And Collusion Allegations
Cryptocurrency exchange Huobi has been accused of voter collusion in elections for EOS block producers (BPs). The Singapore-headquartered exchange acts as one of 21 BPs on the EOS network. Currently, it is coming under allegations that it has been buying and selling BP votes. While Huobi denied the allegations in a recent statement, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently shared his view about the controversy.
The controversy started after screenshots of spreadsheets obtained by China-based EOSONE claimed to record BPs voting for each other. Twitter user Maple Leaf Capital, who is apparently a loyal EOS enthusiast, shared a series of tweets, detailing the Chinese article.
Recently, an internal excel document from Huobi (one of the BPs) is circulating in the Chinese community. This file documents the collusion, mutual voting, and pay-offs that occur amongst the Chinese BP community. I’ m working on getting the file.
— Maple Leaf Capital (@MapleLeafCap) September 26, 2018
EOS Alliance Replies
“Is this actual fact? We don’t have all the evidence to determine, so we need to use the dispute resolution system. Not following our own documented procedures would call into question the goal of having a decentralized system that avoids a single point of failure, but having no clear dispute resolution system that is followed, is, itself, an even greater failure than gaming the system.” said the official post.
Adding, “This requirement for BP independence is enshrined in the Constitution as well as within the REGPRODUCER and VOTEPRODUCER contracts which every Block Producer candidate and every voter, respectively, must agree to.”
The Alliance’s role is not to weigh in on the accuracy of the allegations. It is the role of the Alliance to facilitate dialogue within the community, in whatever form members choose that dialogue to be: negotiation, sharing of interests, rewriting or investigation. They are committed to ensuring the community as a whole understands the facts of this situation and its ramifications on the EOS ecosystem so that they may take informed action.
How would a dispute resolution like this work in practice?
The most likely sequence of events, based on the current governance regime, is:
- One or more EOS mainnet members file a claim with ECAF against alleged vote-sellers and vote-buyers
- ECAF assigns an Arbitrator or 3-person Panel to take the case
- Parties to the dispute are required to place deposits against a potential adverse verdict
- The Arbitrator (or Panel) solicits expert assistance from relevant sources
- Subpoenas are issued and facts are gathered
- All parties are given ample opportunity to question the evidence
- An Arbitrator’s Decision is reached, including an Order if appropriate
- Block Producers carry out the Order if the parties do not comply voluntarily
EOS mainnet dispute resolution is based on the rules of international trade arbitration embodied in UNCITRAL. It can best be contrasted to the “emergency conference call with Vitalik” approach Ethereum used to resolve the DAO Hack. Both involve a “human layer” for dealing with exceptional situations; but only one has the advantages of a documented, fair and open process.