No, Ethereum Name Service is still a clown show
The central criticism of ENS in this blog post - that the multisig (in the past) or the DAO (now) could take away your .ETH name - is not true. No one has the ability to take a .ETH name away from someone. The DAO (which launched Nov 8, not Nov 10 as it said), wasn&#x27;t created to take over that power from the multisig because the multisig didn&#x27;t have that power either. The multisig does manage the ENS root, but the .ETH TLD is permanently locked.<p>Re the fact the DAO controls the pricing and registration parameters of .ETH names, it&#x27;s true that it would be possible for the DAO to change them to something that targets a specific user or name. The DAO cannot take away a .eth name that is registered (it could only make it difficult or practically impossible to extend or register anew). To guard against this, a user can pay ahead for as many years as they want, ensuring they have the name for that period (e.g. 100 years). Given that DAO proposals have required voting periods, it wouldn&#x27;t be possible to surprise this on someone, and they&#x27;d be able to simply extend their registration for 100 years (or whatever period they want) before it went through. As you mention, the ENS constitution also prohibits it. I find this attack vector extremely unlikely to be attempted and near impossible to carry out successfully.<p>There&#x27;s more I could say, but I think these were two main points.