Recently, I saw a discussion in the Zcash community about the voting mechanism that suddenly exploded.

The reason is that the community is considering adjusting the governance structure, and Vitalik directly poured cold water on it—he believes that a pure one-token-one-vote mechanism would hinder efficiency, and that the ideal of DAOs is very appealing, but the reality is quite harsh.

But Naval( is the legendary figure who first advocated for cryptocurrency) and he completely disagrees. He insists that this is how blockchain should be: decentralization must be thorough, and the vested interests cannot be allowed to continue holding power.

The two factions have opposing views, and I can't clearly say which is more suitable for the development path of ZEC. However, one thing is quite clear: as long as the community can ultimately reach a consensus, whichever path is chosen will be a step forward.

The heated debate and participation in this discussion on X has actually made me more confident about the future of Zcash—at least a project that can provoke such deep discussions proves that there are still people who truly care about its future.

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SlowLearnerWang

· 15h ago

It's Vitalik and Naval again, this pair of lively characters... one talks about efficiency while the other talks about ideals, how can they argue so much? I really didn't expect ZEC to stir up such a big wave, I feel like I'm a bit out of the loop again. Is one coin one vote really that disappointing? I thought this was the standard configuration for DAO. Wait, does this controversy actually indicate that ZEC is still alive? That's a bit unexpected.

View OriginalReply0

SelfStaking

· 15h ago

The combination of Vitalik and Naval really does stir up some action every time... Speaking of which, the intensity of the discussion around ZEC is quite interesting. Naval's theory sounds great, but when it comes to implementation? Well... let's take it slow and see. How should I put it, having controversy is better than a stagnant pool, at least it shows that this thing is still alive. Can one coin one vote really solve problems? Seems like this question has been asked for five years now. The fact that this wave of ZEC can attract pros to argue shows... at least it's worth following.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrier

· 15h ago

Haha, Vitalik and Naval are going head to head, this is the top dialogue in the crypto world. The heat around this discussion about ZEC is actually a good thing, it shows that it’s still alive. Is one coin one vote really that inefficient? It feels like both of them have a point. Naval is quite principled, but the reality is harsh. I just want to see how ZEC ultimately chooses, whether to lean towards efficiency or stick to Decentralization. To be honest, I value the process more than the outcome; projects that can debate won’t die. The fact that some people still care about the future of ZEC is worth noting. If there’s Consensus, we can move forward, that’s the key. If one coin one vote is really that trash, why are so many people still promoting it? However, after this discussion, ZEC's followership should increase. I feel like either side winning is acceptable; I’m just afraid it will end up in a mess. Naval’s idealism isn’t quite thriving in the crypto world. If ZEC really changes its mechanism this time, will other DAOs follow suit? In fact, efficiency and Decentralization have always been in opposition, like having fish and bear’s paws. I’m optimistic that ZEC can tough it out and finish this discussion, which is better than many projects.

View OriginalReply0

SerumSqueezer

· 16h ago

Uh, Vitalik is right, one coin one vote is disappointing. Naval's idealism sounds nice, but when it actually lands, it's still going to be played by whales. This time the argument over ZEC is actually not bad; at least it's still alive and can argue. This kind of consensus struggle is much more reliable than those projects that have already been concluded. But speaking of which, efficiency and decentralization are fundamentally like the fish and bear's paw. No matter what you do, there will be someone criticizing; it’s faster to just let the minority obey the majority. Speaking of Zcash's strong privacy, this voting mechanism becomes a bit ironic, huh. The fact that the community can argue shows that there is still enthusiasm, which is better than a stagnant pool.

View OriginalReply0

Trending TopicsView More
#JoinGrowthPointsDrawToWiniPhone17
221.18K Popularity
#DecemberMarketOutlook
13.19K Popularity
#GIGGLEAndPIPPINSurge
2.19K Popularity
#LINKETFToLaunch
1.9K Popularity
#SharingMy100xToken
2.65K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
BEARBear Market Coin
MC:$3.45KHolders:3
0.53%
2
BEARACLESBearacles
MC:$3.34KHolders:1
0.21%
3
bobbob
MC:$3.34KHolders:1
0.00%
4
usa1$AstraCoin
MC:$3.34KHolders:1
0.00%
5
WAWAWawa Cat
MC:$3.36KHolders:1
0.22%

Sitemap