Unpopular opinion: this is wrong
https://x.com/TimBeiko/status/1895220802980847758
We need to use this as an opportunity to see how we can recover from such a situation without slashing. We won't want to slash mainnet honest stakers due to a client bug. A fix update needs to forces a client to a specific chain, ignoring the past, but also start thinking of conditional slashing protection.

Pectra Testnet Update 📣

On Monday, Pectra activated on Holesky. An EL bug caused chain splits, resulting in a minority chain being valid, degrading the network health.

Holesky validators must take action ASAP, some Sepolia users must upgrade their client. All info below 👇

Holesky validators: we are coordinating a mass slashing event tomorrow Feb. 28 around 15:00 UTC. 

You should: 

1. Update your node (see screenshot)
2. Sync your node to head (new CL branches will help)
3. Right before slot 3737760, disable slashing protection

More info here:… https://t.co/oJlcpm3acC

timbeiko.eth

Scientist by day, other things at night.

Writing complex and nuanced takes, viewed by few, appreciated by none.

It's not unpopular and I explain why we are doing this like two tweets after 😄 

https://x.com/TimBeiko/status/1895222606921691305

I get it. It's the best solution for Holesky. But we are missing the opportunity to train from something similar on mainnet, where we don't want such a solution.

If you had to do a recovery, needing to reach finality in a reasonable timeframe (say a few days), but no slashing allowed, how would you go about it? (ignoring coordination and coding challenges, just protocol level). Is there anything we can do today, that will make such a recovery more easy if the need arises in the future?

Getting this far saving Holesky taught us what we're missing to not have to do this on mainnet, so following through to recover Holesky should hopefully teach us more!