EOS – First EOS Derivative Chain Still Not Live

Who Are EOS Evolution

The Evolution project team decided to fork the code (not the chain) as they did not agree with some of the fundamental principles and decisions that the ‘core’ team had implemented. They currently seem to have a major beef with the governance and voting structure the current EOS model uses, and coincidentally, the RAM situation that is hot news right now.

The Evolution project will NOT be a fork of the chain as they will be launching a genesis block of their own, and not forking (the chain has the same contents from a certain point) from the currently running blockchain. Not only that, but they will also be changing the governance system to a model they believe is in true alignment with the foundational principles of cryptocurrency.

There mission statement:

 While EOS has developed a powerful infrastructure for Blockchain Applications, the Governance Structure and Block Producer ownership model leads to highly manipulated compensation and hinders the development of the EOS community. We’ve analyzed the governance structure and ownership rights of BPs (block producers) offered by BlockOne and determined it best to realign voting rights and BP ownership to achieve true decentralization.

A lot of the community was screaming “Scam” when this project was heavily advertising itself on the many forums out there, I tried to keep an open mind, but I think I have reached the limit of excuses I can take.

Is This Real?

As much as I think their intentions are great, I have been following this project for a while now, and it seems the team continually move the goal posts to delay an actual launch of a chain. First, they were waiting for the ERC-20 airdrop to complete, that seems to be taking a ridiculous amount of time, there are still regular talks of the airdrop in the Telegram channel to this day. Those who registered their ERC-20 address to the EOS Eth smart contract where airdropped tokens (some of them anyway), every member that has the tokens received the exact same amount of the EVO tokens (12,287) regardless of how many EOs they held before the snapshot. How do you gain access to these tokens, you will need to use the exact same private and public key that you used on the EOS mainnet on the chain that the EVO team launch, sounds suspect right? Now they seem to be making major code updates to address issues seen in the live EOS chain, but when will that ever end if you are chasing your tail constantly.

As mentioned above, the team now seem to be focusing on how they will implement RAM distribution differently than the main EOS code chain, jumping on the bandwagon of all the naysayers out there, here is what they have to say about it:

Evolution’s four tiered solution to RAM speculation aims to serve developers with a common structure found when purchasing instances from cloud or shared hosting services. This simplifies and bundles resources into various packages preventing specific resources from being directly abused by investor speculation. With the following set of solutions, Evolution is aiming to achieve 600MM active user accounts on a main chain architecture:
1. Removing RAM Speculation & Bancor Liquidity
2. Staking for 30 days & Resource Bundle Tax
3. Restructuring EOS Main Chain Responsibilities
>4. Limiting Main Chain RAM

All they seem to be doing is following the progress of the current chain, and as issues crop up shout “We will do it better than that”. This has just become complete nonsense now, you cannot continually say that you will be launching a chain that is superior to the current version of EOS without actually delivering anything. if they continue to play this game, they will never release anything which is my current stance on the matter, as although EOS is great it is not perfect, more issues will be found. Believe it or not, Dan is only human and course correction will need to happen, the difference e is that the live version of EOS is acknowledging these issues AND addressing them with real solutions.

Are there any supporters of the Evolution project out there that can maybe help me understand why this project is nothing more than vaporware?

Recommend0 recommendationsPublished in Cryptocurrencies, Top Rated, EOS (EOS), Alt EOS Mainnets
30 votes, average: 4.53 out of 530 votes, average: 4.53 out of 530 votes, average: 4.53 out of 530 votes, average: 4.53 out of 530 votes, average: 4.53 out of 5 (30 votes, average: 4.53 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
(1587 total tokens earned)
Loading...

Comments

  1. buyram

    Everipedia announced their airdrop in February. still nothing. Your only argument being that they haven’t finished all token drops is lacking to say the least. Also, I’ve hoarded RAM for a long time and live in the RAM telegram. Dan loves the way RAM is established and loves traders setting the “true price”. I also see that most laissez faire community members within EOS like the trading. Evolution saying that speculation needs to be disrupted is a fair and countertrend ideology. It should be respected and not shrugged off.

    (3)
    1. Adam Clark Post author

      My main argument is that they are portraying themselves as all talk and no sustaintance.

      They keep moving the goal posts in regards to what they need to finish before they can launch a chain, and if they are struggling to complete an airdrop, how will they ever launch a chain.

      (1)
      1. buyram

        They haven’t even said when they plan on launching or when they plan to release a white paper lol. I think they’re making their intentions clear that they’re planning around issues they see developing down the road and only then deploying the chain. Exchanges not being voting portals or BPs is their backbone proposal and why I like EVO. Look at the mess ZB.com exchange is causing and they’re still a top 5 BP somehow. No one has enough EOS to vote out an exchange from the top 10.

        I just read the last medium post from EVO about RAM. I first hand know there’s major long term issues with RAM (I’m a hoarder of RAM myself) since people are hoarding and eventually we’ll need to empty these accounts. That’s why Dan set the cap on assets to 3 years. No one is talking about the true reason Dan set that rule. I’m glad someone is talking about the 3 year issue due to hoarders and actually proposing ideas for the main EOS chain. You know we have a 3 year asset cap in our current constitution due to RAM hoarders? Dan knew the resource wars were coming and that’s the best he could come up with lol

        I haven’t received my airdrop either and I’m a bit thrown off since my friends have. But for that to be your baseline argument is short sided to say the least. I haven’t received airdrops on dates as originally promised by EON, Everipedia, and Huobi HT airdrops. What about all the genesis snapshot airdrops that never actually came? Does that mean all these entities are big talk no game.. maybe? It’s been a month since all these airdrops started proposing drops. I’m keeping an open mind to all of them and even the ones that haven’t finished. Even the ones that airdroped 1% of tokens to one exchange when they said all tokens would be 100% dropped to all wallets (I’m looking at you EON).

        (1)
        1. Adam Clark Post author

          Wow , did I touch a nerve?

          1. “They haven’t even said when they plan on launching”

          2. No one has enough EOS to vote out an exchange from the top 10.

          Not true. Block One will be using there 10% holdings to vote soon.

          That is exactly my point, they are vaporware and really do not add any value. Everything they have issues with are already being fixed on the real version of EOS.

          3. You know we have a 3 year asset cap in our current constitution due to RAM hoarders?

          You do know the ‘current’ constitution is temporary until the referendum and new proposal has been put forward that removes the 3 year hold don’t you?

          4. But for that to be your baseline argument is short sided to say the least.

          That is not my baseline argument, it was one of my arguments. My biggest concern os the constant goal post moving as I stated in my original post, here is a direct quote

          All they seem to be doing is following the progress of the current chain, and as issues crop up shout “We will do it better than that”.

          I then politely followed up to your post saying

          They keep moving the goal posts in regards to what they need to finish before they can launch a chain

          5. What about all the genesis snapshot airdrops that never actually came?

          These are dApps, not block chain to run dApps on, so a completely different kettle of fish

          I tried to be nice but your sarcasm is not needed.

          (0)
  2. YILMAZ KORKMAZ

    Evolution proje ekibinin, ‘çekirdek’ ekibin uyguladığı temel ilke ve kararlardan bazılarını kabul etmeyerek kodu (zincirden değil) çatallandırma kararını almaları ilginç geldi. Bunun için çok fazla çalışmaları ve çıkabilecek sorunları çok iyi tahlil etmeleri gerekecektir.

    (1)