Statement of Updating the Blacklist from ECAF

in statement •  3 months ago

June 26th, 9:55 (Beijing Time) , some voices and discussions about “EosStore updating of the blacklist from ECAF” appeared in Telegram channel EOS Gov. Unfortunately, 3570 EOS had been transferred out from a account(ID:guzdonzugmge). As a block producer, we pay highly and close attention to it and feel regretful for the loss of EOS in these accounts.  


In view of this, EosStore hereby makes this statement: 


ECAF has provided two blacklists, however, the second blacklist was not discussed in the community Zoom meeting no formal announcement of it could be found. The communication system of ECAF is not perfect for ECAF itself is at preliminary stage. The information of these frozen accounts did not appear in following channels: 1. Three Telegram channels: EOSIO Gov, EOS Validation(EMLG) and EOS BP Infrastructure.; 2. Github as the first blacklist did; 3. Zoom video meeting on June 21st. Only in Keybase and EOS 911 could you find this information. Plus current massive fake news, like a fake ECAF arbitration order these days, we did not updated the blacklist in time.


As a block producer devoted to the fair benefits of all token holders, that any loss brought by this inaction is the last thing we want to see. If the Community and other BPs reach a consensus that we need to be responsible for the loss of 3570 EOS, we will absolutely compensate for these accounts to protect the property of related token holders. 


As ECAF has no official channel to publish its announcement currently, in order not to make this kind of thing happen again, EosStore now sends an invitation to all BPs to co-develop a software providing publishing platform for ECAF arbitration orders. Hope BPs join us to make sure the voice of ECAF be executed duly and consistently.


EosStore

June 26th 2018

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

The information of these frozen accounts did not appear in following channels:

  1. Zoom video meeting on June 21st



Hi, i would like to ask the following:

  • Who from @eos.store was on the meetings?

    and

  • How come eos.store and gen mining did not updated the blacklist while the others 19 did? (missing channels?)


PD: Concerns that only requires 1 Bp to push a trx, was not about 2/3+1 ? or i am missing the point here?

·

I agree. that BP would have been rejected and moved on to a standy after multiple consensus failures.

What's the CN corporate registration number for EOS Capital?