2026-01-13 11:37:04

What is the biggest dilemma for traditional institutions going on-chain? The answer is straightforward—loss of control.

But some projects are changing this logic. Take a certain governance platform as an example; they offer holders a completely different path: you can not only participate but also actively influence the direction.

Upgrade roadmap? Token holders vote to decide. Validator framework needs adjustment? The community has the say. There are no centralized commands here, only on-chain democratic decision-making—holders are like shareholders, and the blockchain itself is the board of directors executing proposals.

The core logic of this model is clear: going on-chain is no longer a passive risk but an active control. Participants truly have the power to shape the future of the ecosystem.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

14 Likes

Reward
14
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

FOMOrektGuy

· 1h ago

Sounds good, but how many can actually implement it? Most are still just empty talk about democracy.

View OriginalReply0

wrekt_but_learning

· 3h ago

Talking about democratic decision-making again, but to be honest, how many people can actually vote and make a difference? Most of the time, it's still the big players who hold the power.

View OriginalReply0

HodlKumamon

· 3h ago

Oh wow, this is true on-chain democracy, data speaks for itself(◍•ᴗ•◍) --- The sense of losing control is indeed a concern for institutions, but if governance is handled this way, could it instead turn into a situation where big players call the shots? --- Hey, isn't this just moving the equity system onto the blockchain? It has that familiar feel. --- Bear thinks this logic is beautiful, but can the execution efficiency match centralized decision-making... --- Finally, someone is seriously working on this, not just shouting slogans. --- Token holders vote to decide, but what about the influence of whales... wait, I need to calculate the weight distribution. --- Sounds great, but when it comes to on-chain voting, how many people will participate seriously? --- Is this model mature? Is there data to support it? Bear is very interested. --- Brilliant, it's like moving the board of directors onto the public chain, voting equals execution, and the intermediary costs are directly halved.

View OriginalReply0

MetaverseMigrant

· 4h ago

Sounds good, but how many can really be implemented? Most are just talk on paper. Talking about democratic decision-making every day, but in the end, it's still the big players who call the shots. I've seen this logic too many times... Let's see how it goes after half a year. Wait, do their governance tokens have lock-up periods? That's very important. I'm not trying to pour cold water, but it just feels like it's easy to say that holders will lead this, but hard to actually do. On-chain democracy sounds great, but what about actual voting participation? If it can truly solve the sense of losing control, then it really would rewrite the game rules.

View OriginalReply0

RugResistant

· 4h ago

Well said, this is what Web3 should look like. The old "trust me" approach of traditional institutions has long been outdated; on-chain democracy is the way out. --- Voting and community consensus sound great, but I'm just worried it might be another oligarchic rule under a different guise. --- Handshake, the feeling of losing control is indeed a major concern for large institutions going on-chain. But is true decentralization really that simple... --- This is the kind of power holders should have; otherwise, what's the point of holding tokens? --- Finally, someone has clearly explained it. Many projects on-chain before were just superficial changes; now this is real decentralization. --- Hmm... sounds good, but can token holders really make good decisions, or is it just another form of inner circle competition in the crypto world? --- I just want to see if this democratic mechanism really works without crashing, betting five cents. --- Brilliant! Comparing blockchain to a board of directors is a perfect analogy; it makes it easier for institutional bosses to understand.

View OriginalReply0

StablecoinAnxiety

· 4h ago

It's the same old rhetoric of "democracy"... Who really holds the voting power? Isn't it true that large holders' one vote equals a thousand votes? It sounds truly decentralized, but in reality, those early big holders always hold the real power. We newcomers are just along for the ride. But then again, this is still better than being completely controlled by black-box decisions... It's a kind of progress. How many projects have actually implemented this governance model? Hopefully not just another PPT project.

View OriginalReply0