2026-01-09 10:28:51

Recently, many people have been asking: Is mining really fair? Will project teams genuinely use industry profits to buy back tokens? Or has the official secretly accumulated a large number of chips?

These concerns are actually quite normal. However, from the current situation, early volunteers hold a reasonable amount of tokens based on the mining mechanism itself, and since everyone agrees not to sell, these people have actually become the strongest mutual supervision team. Volunteers are not here to seek profit; they are believers by nature. This organizational strength is very hard to shake.

Of course, achieving complete decentralization at every stage is unrealistic. What is the true future direction? It must be a combination of decentralization and centralization—driving decentralization as the core force, with centralization used to supplement services. Only then can the project truly expand into various industry sectors and carry out disruptive transformations of traditional models.

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

OnchainDetectiveBing

· 01-09 10:56

Honestly, this set of logic sounds quite ideal, but can believers really resist temptation? I'm a bit skeptical about early volunteers self-disciplining not to sell. What about when the coin price increases tenfold? I've seen the hybrid of centralized and decentralized approaches many times, but in the end, it's still whoever has more power that makes the decisions. How can we supervise buyback commitments? By the way, have you really seen the official wallet? However, the volunteer role can indeed create constraints, which is a fresh idea. Complete trust and complete distrust are both unrealistic; finding a balance is the way out. Whether the mining mechanism itself is fair depends on the details of the profit distribution. A team with mutual supervision sounds good, but I'm worried that if people's hearts drift apart, the team will fall apart.

View OriginalReply0

WalletDetective

· 01-09 10:53

Early volunteers are indeed the best overseers, much more reliable than the official hype.

View OriginalReply0

ImpermanentSage

· 01-09 10:29

Is mining fairness really just about who has the chips? Do believers self-regulate? Sounds ideal, but history keeps repeating itself. A combination of decentralization and centralization... hmm, it sounds like both sides want to have it all. The real question is, do volunteers truly remain unaffected? Do early miners still hold their positions now? I remain skeptical.

View OriginalReply0