Criticism of $EOS to $A Transition Highlights Need for Community Voting

I believe that the transition from $EOS to $A has caused several unforeseen issues, particularly disrupting the protocol tools that are no longer being actively maintained. This lack of ongoing support is problematic and raises questions about the overall stability and reliability of the network following the change. In my view, the decision to transition should have been carefully weighed with a clear understanding of the trade-offs involved. The current scenario suggests that the costs outweigh the benefits, as it has led to operational disruptions without sufficient strategic advantage. It might be prudent to implement a voting process for such significant protocol changes in the future to ensure community consensus and better decision-making. Given the apparent negative impact on protocol tooling and maintenance, I remain skeptical about the overall value and long-term viability of this transition. Stakeholders should consider these factors critically before proceeding with similar upgrades or changes. While transitions and upgrades are essential for protocol evolution, they must be executed with comprehensive risk assessments. Ensuring active maintenance and community involvement can help mitigate unforeseen consequences and align the protocol's development with its users' interests.