One of the first significant in crypto-history of voting now takes place on the Ethereum blockchain. According to its initiators, it will give objective data that I think the representatives of the community about possible recovery frozen on the custom purse Parity funds, says Trustnodes.
We will remind that in November of 2017, the developer of Parity by mistake deleted the smart contract, which led to the freezing of 500,000 ETH (about $317 million) in the blockchain network. Most experts agree that the solution to this problem required hardwork.
At the moment the vote was attended by two million coins ETH, of which 69% voted to restore Parity and return 500 thousand coins of ether. Accordingly, 31% of participants opposed.
The developers abandoned the proposed solutions
It is noted that developers and others should voice their opinions about voting and then make their own suggestions on the best way to solve the problem, if the hard forks they think is wrong.
At the time acne Buterin said: “what I see, Parity is the only company offering changes through the fork and the vast majority clearly opposes him”. Now what he will say after the results of the survey?
King @VitalikButerin deciding Parity”s fate. pic.twitter.com/3LuC7vGaYs
— Kevin Pham (@_Kevin_Pham) 22 APR 2018
The need for compromise
The publication believes that Ethereum is in the process of improvement of the network, advancing by trial and error, so such problems of the emergence of vulnerabilities is to be expected and natural.
A vulnerability in the wallet, Multi-sig Parity was discovered quite by accident, and there is no guarantee that similar failures will not occur again. The Ethereum is still in such an early stage, the space is so tiny compared to what it could be, so much more to Refine and learn that we should not punish the pioneers of adopting the cryptocurrency.
The publication called on all owners of Ethereum, no matter how many coins they have 1 or 1000, to vote, to get an objective opinion, and to prove that the network is not so centralized that decisions about the important events in it took one person or a small group of people.
Remarkable is not even the question that was raised during the vote, and the fact that we have applied a new system for decision-making, which takes into account the opinion of the community. It now remains to wait for its results and learn: do the organizers listen to the opinions of the owners of the ETH?