EOS Ecosystem Under Crisis: Governance Failures and Economic Flaws Lead to Systemic Collapse

The controversy surrounding the EOS ecosystem fundamentally represents a concentrated outbreak of faults in its economic model and governance failures. The core issue lies in the resource allocation mechanism being dominated by capital arbitrage logic, resulting in a serious imbalance between ecosystem development and short-term gains. Key contradictions include governance paradoxes in capital flow, such as the divergence between RAM promises and actual operations, and the REX system's transformation into an arbitrage loophole where capital exploits the market for high returns, disproportionately benefiting top nodes while ordinary users face frequent transaction delays and increased costs. Systemic flaws facilitate the emergence of problematic behaviors, including internal corruption driven by economic model flaws, with resource speculation leading to runaway RAM prices and high idle rates, as well as a proliferation of speculative applications relying on fund-driven cycles. Governance centralization at high node vote thresholds leads to the marginalization of small developers, consolidating decision-making power among node elites who control both proposal approvals and reward distributions, further undermining decentralization. Trust deficits deepen with repeated breaches of promises, opaque fund flows, and lack of transparency, eroding stakeholder confidence, as seen in suspicious on-chain activities and unreported data on key metrics. Comparing EOS to healthier public chains reveals a distorted resource and governance structure, where resources serve financial arbitrage rather than application development, and governance is dominated by elite interests instead of governance balances. This issue underscores a classic challenge in blockchain governance: without mechanisms resistant to corruption, rent-seeking capital inevitably erodes technological ideals. To remediate, EOS must reconstruct the balance among developer incentives, resource costs, and governance authority—such as redistributing REX profits into developer funds—otherwise systemic failure and problematic behaviors will persist.