I think ECAF made a big mistake by not providing the evidence directly, but this system of on-chain governance isn't "dead in the water" if it can actually work to protect life, liberty, property, and justice in a non-violent way. Some are just ignorant about EOS is designed to work, so they don't have properly aligned expectations.
Do you think all the BPs should ignore this emergency arbitration finding since adequate proof hasn't yet been given, even though the accounts involved directly asked to be frozen in an attempt to save their property from being lost?
Care to elaborate?
I think ECAF made a big mistake by not providing the evidence directly, but this system of on-chain governance isn't "dead in the water" if it can actually work to protect life, liberty, property, and justice in a non-violent way. Some are just ignorant about EOS is designed to work, so they don't have properly aligned expectations.
Do you think all the BPs should ignore this emergency arbitration finding since adequate proof hasn't yet been given, even though the accounts involved directly asked to be frozen in an attempt to save their property from being lost?