Ethereum's more experienced developers are calling for a public debate over what, if any, measures should be taken at the software level to recover the funds lost in large-scale hackers and hackers .
At a biweekly meeting on Friday, developers took sides for a controversial proposal to improve the Ethereum, EIP 867 which advocates a method of restitution of funds. to potential victims. As presented by CoinDesk the problem has become a lightning rod due to the fact that the proposal advocates the use of software upgrades at the system level as a possible solution.
It may not have been a surprise as the meeting introduced the passions on either side of what is becoming one of the platform's most important arguments.
Yet others have sought a more intermediate solution, such as having a more public debate.
Vlad Zamfir, developer of the Ethereum, told participants:
"These proposals, especially the proposals that set important precedents, that have an impact on the community and the platform, must be the subject of a public debate of which I do not I am not certain to be able to handle. "
In response, the community director, Hudson Jameson, agreed, stating that he thought the debate should be played on social media. Similarly, independent developer Alexey Akhunov has proposed a live video debate between developers.
Some, however, have put forth a tone reserved for the idea.
The developer Piper Merriam warned that a live chat could become a "politician affair", stating that the debate should remain written. "Otherwise it's a popularity contest," he said.
As such, the comments allude to another element of the debate, one that addressed the question of what role developers should play in blocking proposals for public discussion.
EIP 867, for example, is headed by the lesser known developer Dan Phifer of Musiconomi, a start-up that lost a substantial amount of ether in the parity bottoms gel . last year .
Yoichi Hirai, editor of the EIP, rejected the proposal because of his refusal to comply with what he described as an "ethereal philosophy", but he now adopts a more liberal approach , claiming that "the EIP repository is like Twitter."
"Anyone can say what he wants and I am merging everything," he said.
For the moment, no further action will likely be taken on the proposal as long as the etheric process to accept code changes, detailed in EIP-1 n & nbsp; Has not been clarified.
However, Jameson said today that the current controversy had accelerated such efforts.
Piece of silicon via Shutterstock