EOS Block Producer EOShenzhen Is Allegedly Profiting From Sock Puppets
Share this article
EOShenzhen, the 59th largest EOS block producer, has been accused of creating multiple EOS accounts and violating other rules, according to community members and block producers. ColinTalksCrypto, who runs EOS’s largest voting proxy, raised the issue via Twitter on Thursday, Nov. 21.
“When threatened with removal, these sockpuppet Block Producer accounts created … perfunctory, superficial websites (within 1 day) to ‘conform to standards’ in order to avoid removal,” ColinTalksCrypto stated. “Same site design. Same title font. Same non-existent information. They’re the same BP.”
Prior to this, AlohaEOS and other block producers voted to remove the six accounts on the grounds that they had no website or means of contact. In order to comply with this part of the Block Producer Agreement, the accounts registered six websites ― all of which seem to be registered to EOShenzhen.
Rewards Are At Stake
EOShenzhen’s alleged accounts (eosunioniobp, stargalaxybp, eosathenabp1, eosrainbow, eoszeusiobp, and validatoreos) have not attracted enough votes to become top 21 or “active” block producers. They have little power, but they are collecting financial rewards ― as much as $300 of EOS per account each day.
EOS’s Constitution and Block Producer Agreement do not explicitly forbid block producers from creating multiple accounts, but it seems that doing so is an abuse of the system. Given that block producers have already taken a stance, it is possible that a future vote will be held to remove the sockpuppet accounts.
EOS New York has also alleged that the crypto exchange Bithumb is responsible for funding the voting proxy that supports the six accounts. However, Bithumb has been openly voting for block producers since June. EOS New York was not available for comment as to why its linked transaction is out of the ordinary.
Preventing Future Problems
Some EOS users are advocating for a permanent change to EOS’s voting system: a “one token, one vote” policy would ensure that voting for a single block producer carries more weight than voting for multiple block producers. In theory, this would discourage sockpuppets, collusion, and other forms of wrongdoing.
There is another possibility. Block.one, the company behind EOS, has announced that it plans to vote for block producers. Block.one holds 9.5% of the EOS supply, which gives it a small but significant amount of power. It will presumably vote for established and reputable BPs, which might mitigate corruption.
Despite EOS’s ongoing controversies, it has adapted itself to the demands of the community. Over the past year, EOS has eliminated its unpopular arbitration body (ECAF), burned $167 million of funds, and introduced a referendum system. The platform is clearly willing to change, even if those changes rarely solve concrete problems.