It’s actually worse because even participating in that discussion is too scary for most community members. Most just want to keep their heads down and stay out of “the drama”. Wish I realized how true this was when I originally on protecting the EIP process from special interests. In retrospect, it may have been more productive to post separately regarding the specific concerns around EIP 3074 being promoted by those who had conflicts of interests. That way community members that believe we should make improvements to the EIP process could talk about that without worrying too much they’re making powerful enemies.
This is very true. I took a break from posting on EM after account abstraction devs reached out to me and asked me to stop criticizing EIP 3074 or the underhanded methods used to campaign for it. Why would they ask me to shut up? Because they’re afraid some powerful “core devs” will hold them guilty by association. “The core devs are the governance team. We are secondary”
I took a break for a couple weeks, but with all due respect to the account abstraction team, I believe the problems with ACD & governance are upstream of the specific dispute around account abstraction and are possibly more consequential. Better to hack at the root than hack at the leaves.
So at the risk of pissing everyone off even more I felt like I had to explain why I strongly disagree with this common misconception that client devs are “the governance team” or that it is a good idea for them to have any special powers to settle disputes: