EOS uses a consensual participation-testing algorithm. In this system, the chip holders agree with 21 representatives known as Block Producers (BP), who maintain the history of the block chain and receive rewards.
This system proved to be faster than the work-test or impact testing systems because there are fewer decision makers and only compete during the election phase. However, this creates fears of partial decentralization.
This fear seems to be confirmed, as announced last week, that the nodes have exchanged, voted and shared their votes.
A note from Mapple Leaf Capital on Twitter showed a continuing debate over unconfirmed reports that Huobi Crypto Exchange had received EOS in exchange for BP votes. The news would likely include leaked Huobi tables showing that he accepted money to support BP.
The allegations read that Huobi voted for another 20 BP while receiving 16 BP votes. In addition, the stock market would have voted in favor of a number of third parties in favor of a variable percentage of earnings in EOS.
EOS response to language purchases
In response to the beer scandal, Block.one, the creators of EOS recognized the news of the scandal and said they would not be left without doing anything if there was a problem. In his statement published on Tuesday it says:
“We are aware some claims are not reviewed in terms of voting manufacturers of illegal and subsequent denials of these claims. We believe that it is important to ensure free and democratic elections within EOS, and, if appropriate, to vote with other headlines to improve the integrity of this process.
The degree of decentralization of the EOS platform has been questioned several times, and some observers argue that it is more a centralized government than a fully decentralized government.
The acquisition of votes is banned by the EOS Constitution, but the constitution has not yet been ratified by EOS users.