The project DAO dilemma is what to do when something is broken and any conceivable way to fix it is contrary to your philosophy of existence.
Something about stolen project Ethers The DAO 3,5 million, someone exploited a vulnerability published a few days before to create a Smart Contract son of DAO and thus use the function that exploit the bug.
He managed to remove aprox. 50 million dollars in currency Token DAO.
Later a security mechanism was activated and started the countdown of 27 days, this would be the period will the community to implement a solution, before the new owner can get back to move the funds withdrawn from the DAO.
They have raised two main solutions, the hard-fork and soft-fork, the first has been virtually discarded from the beginning because you feel too aggressive precedent in handling the blockchain, something that goes 100% against the philosophy of this platform.
Much else is talking about the Soft-fork, also called lesser evil, with which it wants to return the funds to the former owners without going back in time or cancel any previous transfers.
The way to implement this solution is still unclear, there is talk of redesigning the contract to force the account of the thief to go returning the money, this may not seem like a drastic measure, but if we think that the philosophy of the Smart Contracts is they are their own government and the rules apply equally to all, and ounds a bit more trick.
The confidence of participants in a contract is based on the rules that the contract runs are always the same, and is unchangeable.
Finally soft-fork was aborted because it shown a vulnerability, and the community, developers and miners have voted the new solution.
The results can be seen here: http://carbonvote.com/
It is clear, that this is an exceptional case, but it is not so clear that people can ever trust this platform if there is a manipulation of a few on a consensus that is all.
In any case, the outcome next week.