The proposal to finance the development of Ethereum by temporarily increasing the level of cryptocurrency inflation was strongly opposed by community members, the Decrypt portal writes.
The idea was framed as a proposal for improving Ethereum EIP-2025 last month and was discussed during the developers meeting on July 18. According to the terms of the EIP, the reward for adding blocks to the cryptocurrency network should be increased by 0.0055 ETH within 18 months to raise funds for the benefit of the funding organization. It is assumed that in this way it will be possible to gain about $ 3 million at the current rate.
Spankchain CEO Amin Suleymani, who organized MolochDAO’s alternative fund-raising system, was one of the main critics of the proposal. According to him, the approval of the EIP will reduce the attractiveness of Ethereum as a means of accumulation.
The founder of the crypto-investment company Mythos Capital, Ryan Adams, the head of marketing for SetProtocol Anthony Sassano and the Operations Director of the RealT Platform, David Hoffman, also opposed the proposal. CTO Groundhog Pay Andrew Redden summed up the discussion, calling the events “a disaster EIP-2025”.
Skeptics see the main problem of EIP in appointing individuals who will manage additional rewards and become their final recipients.
“I am not ready to confirm that I know how to allocate these funds in the best way,” said EIP author James Hancock. He put forward the idea of the formation of a decentralized organization (DOA), which in some way will solve the task and ensure the transparency of the process.
The proposal was actively discussed this Monday, after Gnosis project researcher Eric Conner drew attention to it. “It looks like the EIP-2025 is being seriously considered for inclusion in Istanbul,” he wrote, referring to the forthcoming hard fork Ethereum. – Absolutely absurd! That can’t happen. ”
At the same time, some participants in the discussion note that there are no evidence in the notes on the results of the developers meeting that it was really about the inclusion of the EIP-2025 in Istanbul. On the contrary, the discussion concerned the exclusion of certain projects with the aim of narrowing the scope of the update.
“There is nothing in the records that would indicate a serious consideration of this issue. The only reference is neutral – it was made by the author of the proposal, – writes the developer Udi Wertheimer. “Even I know that this proposal has no chance of approval.”