neo VS solana

Neo (3400 GitHub Stars) https://github.com/neo-project/neo

Some discussion that covers many of the arguments on both sides here: https://github.com/neo-project/neo/issues/2118

Take a look at something like https://github.com/neo-project/neo or https://github.com/Felandil/tangle-.net to see how much work is really required just to get something basic up and running.

Yes, this was a topic of considerable debate during N3's development. The degree to which one considers it a serious issue really depends on what one sees as the key features of governance--stability vs. democratic expression, etc. Of course, the basic fact of a node falling out of the top 21 isn't weird; the question is more around how easy it should be to get back in.

It's good discuss the voting mechanism and other aspects of NEO. Have you seen the comments on GitHub? A lot of people and devs (also people ^_^) are there, for example: https://github.com/neo-project/neo/issues/2598

One, there has been quite a bit of discussion over the past year about the design of the new governance system, and its potential flaws with respect to promoting node turnover--e.g. here, but also at various times in this sub (sidebar, you'll see that your "votes are reset" idea was proposed in that thread, say). As an oversimplified TL;DR, I think many--myself included--would agree with you that the system tends to promote the status quo. Where things get muddy is whether that's a feature or a bug. For reasons of both regulatory compliance and stability, the Neo team has intentionally designed a system where turnover, while possible, isn't specifically incentivized; that is, in their view it should happen because there's a strong, governance-related reason for it, not because of financial incentives.

The governance model has been designed to incentivise stability while still allowing flexibility. However, the issue you raise is already being discussed on GitHub here: https://github.com/neo-project/neo/issues/2598

Solana (9700 GitHub Stars) https://github.com/solana-labs/solana

EIP Core standards: Changes to Solana’s core code go through “feature gates” in the Solana repo. Yes, it’s much less organized than the EIP pages you are used to, and a headache to understand or keep up with. A cost of the speed of development, I’m told.

I visited the project on github (https://github.com/solana-labs/solana), and tried to get an overview of the ~800 open issues and ~100 open PRs.

Solana

With the introduction of new and advanced blockchain platforms in the Web 3.0 scene, the narrative around Ethereum has slowly shifted towards its younger “Ethereum Alternatives”. Solana, Avalanche, and MultiversX (former Elrond) are some of the crypto blockchains that are given this terminology, as they share similar features but are comparatively cheaper and better than Ethereum.

I understand this initiative is connected with Solana network [1] in some way?

[1] https://solana.com/

They do, actually: https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/security/policy

Not sure I understand your question, but if you want the source code you can find it on github (https://github.com/solana-labs/solana)

Some topics that may be discussed in the next call include @ShinobiSystems Timely Vote Credits proposal (https://github.com/solana-labs/solana/blob/master/docs/src/proposals/timely-vote-credits.md), @elusivprivacy new built-in cryptographic operations to accelerate ZK verification (for privacy tech), and feature activation coordination standards.