### In today’s video I share some thoughts about EOS

<center>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9UkTh2TV_Tg" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</center>


# Fanciful 'nice-to-have'
Right now, all the ‘drama’ around governance and arbitration is a classic example of a blockchain getting in it’s own way. 

The primarily appeal of EOS is as a decentralised blockchain platform that can scale and deliver a myriad of applications similar to Steemit. 

Everything else is secondary. 

The governance/ arbitration feature is at best a nice-to-have and at worse a fanciful distraction.

# Lightweight, light-touch governance
While I understand the appeal of account recovery, there are more straight forward (and scalable) ways of delivering it. As STEEM as proved. 

Also any governance on a decentralised blockchain should aim to be both lightweight and light touch. Failing that the application and administration of governance over disputes on the chain should *at the very least* be clear and unambiguous. 

# Block.One Splash
Another point I touch on in the video is Block.One announcing their intention to exercise their voting right. 

This will undoubtedly have a huge impact on the make-up of the block producers and the direction of the platform. 

People can debate whether it is a good or bad thing. I simply say it is a DPOS thing. In that those with the biggest stake have the option to exercise the biggest say. Given they have the most to lose if it all goes pear shaped. 

# Hands on Dan
I also forewarn that, from our experience with STEEM, @dan is very hands on in terms of expressing his opinion in an attempt to influence the direction of platforms he is involved with. 

@dan's principles and politics are clear. They are the driver behind his projects. If he feels something is going wrong, he’ll look to chance it fast. 

This was witnessed in the amount of hard forks that happened in the early days of STEEM. Many of the changes were birthed from @dan's 'proposals.’

# Slow burn Ned
@dan’s mindset can also be contrasted with the laissez faire approach of @ned and the current Steemit team. 

Although Steemit are the largest STEEM stakeholder they do not exercise their witness voting right and remain neutral in terms of commenting on activities that could be seen as detrimental for the platform. Preferring to leave it to everyone else in the community to set rules and boundaries. Which often results in the largest active whales setting the tone.

The current Steemit team is focused on ‘big ticket’ infrastructure developments like SMTs, Hivemind and Communities. With a view to minimising the ‘Steemit’ role in the eco-system and encouraging third party entrepreneurs to pick up the mantle in terms of building out applications - and supporting them via delegation if needs be.

That's my take on the EOS/ STEEM contrast.

# Quick of the Blocks
It remains to be seen which approach will work best in the long run. 

However if EOS holders expected Block.One, with their 100million tokens and $4bn war chest to ‘wait-and-see’ how it plays out, they will be in for a rude awakening. Whether this is an example of Block.One ‘getting in it’s own way’ remains to be seen. However it will be interesting to where it all leads.