Dan Larimer, founder of EOS, proposed on Wednesday, June 27, in a surprise way that the project must change its constitution and be replaced by a new one. The pronouncement of the executive comes just 2 weeks after the launch of this protocol.

The information was released in a conversation established on the EOSGov channel of the Telegram messaging service. Larimer himself later published his arguments for this change in the Medium platform .

One of the group members asked Larimer directly: "Am I correct in understanding that you are proposing the removal of the entire current constitution and replacing it with one that only refers to the arbs being able to decide on the VS code? and vulnerabilities / pirates like DAO? " Then Larimer answered "Yes."

The main argument to suggest this change is that the current constitution gives too much power to the arbitrators , according to the bitcoinist.com website.

The current parameter requires that all intelligent contracts in the network remain "documented with a Ricardian Contract, which declares the intention of all parties and that names the Arbitration Forum that will resolve disputes arising from that contract."

This means that the arbitrators are able to resolve disputes directly without having defined the scope of their authority. The situation limits the application of the law. Larimer's proposal is to limit the authority to rule over aspects that arise from the differences between code and intent, hacking and vulnerability management.

DIFFICULTY MAKING CHANGES

The change proposed by the programmer is not easy to do. If he decides to revoke by himself it would be evident that the project is centralized, that without taking into account that they would be committing a legislative suicide. In fact, the constitution does not have a clause that specifies a scenario of this type.

The clause that most closely resembles Larimer's wishes is the XIII which states verbatim: "The Constitution and the documents that are subordinate may not be amended except by a vote of the token holders with at least 15% voting participation. between tokens and not less than 10% more votes Yes, No, sustained for 30 continuous days within a period of 120 days ".

In general, if the new proposal of the founder were to be voted on, the suggested changes would not become reality until after 120 days.

In Medium, Larimer explained: "Ricardian contracts should be drafted in such a way that all actions permitted by the intent of the code are valid actions and parties should not be expected to refrain from actions that are beyond the scope of the code to do comply".

A few days ago the agency in charge of resolving disputes in the EOS community decided to freeze 27 accounts indefinitely, only two weeks after their main network was activated amid criticism, allegations of vulnerabilities and lack of votes. In addition, one day after its launch, said network was stopped for five hours due to a failure in the management of transactions.