RE: Why EOS BPs should follow rulings from dispute resolution
Thank you very much for the reply. I had trouble understanding the motivation behind BPs who are disregarding the ECAF's decisions and the Constitution, which everyone agrees to with every transaction. "BPs want to rule EOS": that's a very interesting observation, and I hadn't quite connected those dots (the possible 'why' behind these refusals to follow ECAF decisions). The BPs want power, which is a very human behavior.
I strongly believe that EOS needs a Constitution: the blockchain is a system for humans, by humans... the dream of code, alone, as a perfect law that governs the blockchain without human intervention, will eventually fail. The human hand should be clear to all, via the Constitution, rather than hiding behind "code" and the pursuit of power. I am still thinking these issues through, and I really appreciate your reply!
I think it is normal and human to bridle at control. BPs are mostly staffed by technical blockchain people who have subscribed to the concept of code as law. They are unused to community.
These people are perceiving the control of ECAF as threatening to them. What they don't see is that the control is a mutual agreement that we all give up, in order to govern our community better against serious attacks.
The BPs fall into 3 groups: those who do see the wider picture, those who bridle at individual control and prefer Bitcoin-style anarchy, and those who are actually breaching the Constitution because it is making them money.
The question before the community is who you want running the blockchain? Do you want BPs that are part of the Community, respect its Constitution in whatever form, and accept the responsibilities that come with it? Or do you want something else?