So BIP 33 promised us a step towards decentralization and transparency by - among other points - making multisig members public. This is a basic requirement of any multisig, any argument that it would ‘compromise the safety of the signers’ is just absurd, should they truly feel that way, they shouldn’t be signers. Without knowing who is signer the entire concept of multisig falls flat, it could be all one person for what we know.
Added to that, that the current multisig is highly flawed (and that’s putting it nicely) since out of the 5 ‘members’ 2 accounts are ghost accounts, that have never voted or done any kind of transaction with their wallets, this is very suspicious which is why I don’t consider the current implementation as ‘multisig’, let’s call it 'governance '.
Now, even knowing that for a while, BIP 33 was going to fix this, so why make a big deal out of it.
Well, it has been almost 10 days after the proposal was passed and we’re still no step further. The governance is still making decisions without any oversight (for instance, taking 15.7 BTC out of the treasury on the 9th- I’d assume that is related to BIP 31 but where in that text was it mentioned to give the power over this to governance? I recall that the DAO was supposed to be in charge of those funds, yet now it’s sitting in the governance contract. And, why do this now and not wait until we finally have a multisig in place?
And what’s worse, out of those funds, 23 ETH have been transferred to an EOA (ie a common wallet), which had initially be funded by yearn multisig. I have no clue what this is for or if that was announced or voted on…
And I guess that pretty much proves my point, with the current governance, there’s no accountability over anything. This isn’t a DAO if the keys to the empire are held by 1-2 persons.
Links to the transactions mentioned:
So this doesn’t have anything to do with what I wrote above, just stumbled above it and it looks strange- Badger Guardian withdrawing 6 ETH from TornadoCash? Why?