web3.js VS neo

Web3.js (16500 GitHub Stars) https://github.com/web3/web3.js/

- https://github.com/web3/web3.js - Web3 JavaScript

last I checked web3.js only supports EVM coins / tokens. Was there an announcement I missed?

I have attempted to increase the maxReceivedFrameSize in my truffle-config, which is a solution offered here like so:

Here is a way to do this using web3.js.

Since we will build a Web3 example, the web3 framework was installed using npm (other options can be found here):

yeah, I could see that.

web3.js is a super bloated library and will be added more frequently unless a team does a more optimal version from scratch

https://github.com/ChainSafe/web3.js/issues/1178

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