EOS Remove Producer: Subscriber Comment Changed My View
As a result of a comment from 2kings3queens I decided to change my opinion on the rmvproducer function that came up in my interview with Rob Konsdorf from EOS Detroit. Support the EOS Tips channel by sending an EOS Tip to this EOS account: chrisjsconey
Sources:
The interview with EOS Detroit:
The rmvproducer function in question:
https://github.com/EOS-Mainnet/eos/blob/1509de21b2013581ed13c266b3047284cc8c4d88/contracts/eosio.system/eosio.system.cpp#L88-L93
I also agree with your change of opinion as another consideration is that token holders are not exercising their votes as much in these initial phases. Last time I saw, only about 30% of token holders have voted for block producers. This is like due to people not knowing how, not trusting the process, or just holding the asset for trading. Therefore, I think it would be to the benefit of the protocol that the block producers handle these issues.
This is like due to people not knowing how, not trusting the process, or just holding the asset for trading:
Yes, I agree with you. I'm not comfortable with the voting process and exactly which BPs to vote for. I'm not seeing any reason why I should vote for one BP rather than another one.
good post
thats really cool feature i would like to know how can we buy ram?
Whilst I agree this function is necessary it opens up a lot of questions.
If the BP is deactivated what is the path to recovery?
Once deactivated all votes likely lose weight.
How are voters alerted that BP XYZ has been removed and one of your votes is no longer valid?
So many considerations.