2026-01-10 05:28:56

What kind of governance model can truly bring a protocol to life? Walrus's answer is straightforward—give decision-making power to the community.

The core positioning of the WAL token is governance. Unlike some projects where power always remains in the hands of the team, Walrus has made a complete reversal: fully entrusting key decisions for ecosystem development to WAL holders. This sounds simple, but it actually changes the entire operational logic of the protocol.

Specifically, the scope of community voting decisions is quite broad. Want to integrate a new dApp into the ecosystem? Voting decides. How much should transaction fees be adjusted? How to set staking rewards? These core parameters are also decided by voting. Even the technical upgrade directions of the storage network are determined by on-chain voting from token holders. Every vote is recorded on the chain, and the results are automatically executed, with no middlemen earning a spread.

What’s powerful about this mechanism? It allows the protocol to quickly adapt to market changes. When user demand for privacy storage suddenly surges, the community can vote to accelerate related feature development. Facing regulatory changes? Governance can quickly adjust protocol parameters to adapt. Compared to some traditional centralized decision-making, Walrus’s approach gives the ecosystem the ability to evolve autonomously.

Deeper than that, this governance model greatly enhances community participation and cohesion. Every WAL holder is no longer a passive spectator but a decision-maker in the ecosystem’s evolution. This sense of identity and ownership often stimulates long-term vitality within the community. When community members participate because of their own interests and the ecosystem’s vision, the resilience and adaptability of a protocol truly emerge.

WAL0,2%

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.

12 Likes

Reward
12
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ChainPoet

· 5h ago

This is true decentralization, not just on paper. Voting rights are truly implemented, unlike some projects where votes are meaningless. The community makes decisions and benefits themselves, no wonder it has such strong vitality.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeLover

· 01-11 12:30

Really? Can voting actually be executed automatically? Hopefully it's not one of those votes where nothing changes after half a day.

View OriginalReply0

OnchainGossiper

· 01-10 05:58

It sounds good, but how many people can actually vote... --- Another story of decentralization, but in the end, the whales still call the shots. --- This logic sounds nice, but I'm worried that voting will end up being just a formality. --- Community governance, I've heard about it countless times in the early days. Can Walrus really make it work... --- Automatic voting execution without approval—what if this gets maliciously exploited? --- Compromise? Instead of trusting the community, why not trust the code? At least the code won't contradict itself. --- Quick adaptability sounds great, but frequent parameter changes might just be another kind of hassle. Who's responsible for ensuring user experience? --- If participation really reaches such a high level, how many people are willing to spend time voting... --- But indeed, compared to projects that are built behind closed doors, this approach looks much more appealing. --- On-chain recording and automatic execution sound very Web3, but community voting itself can easily be controlled by large stakeholders.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityNinja

· 01-10 05:56

Community governance sounds ideal, but can the voting turnout be maintained? The more people there are, the easier it is to be dominated by big players. Is Walrus truly decentralizing power, or just changing the way to harvest profits? We'll see what happens next. This is what a DAO should look like; other projects should learn from it. Automatic voting execution sounds great, but I'm worried it might be a bug that gets executed. Governance tokens ultimately turn into power games; don't believe me? Just look. Projects that care about community participation tend to last the longest.

View OriginalReply0

UnluckyValidator

· 01-10 05:44

Voting sounds great, but I'm afraid the final say still lies with the whales. When will true decentralization stop being just a transfer of power? Walrus is going to be popular, finally seeing someone willing to delegate authority. Centralized teams are doomed anyway, it's only a matter of time. It's good in theory, but the key is in execution; on-chain voting can also be manipulated. At least it's much better than those pretending to be decentralized. Wait, parameter adjustments are all decided by community voting? Doesn't that raise efficiency issues? Sounds good, but in reality, it's just dispersing the power to shift blame. This is the kind of Web3 we should have; other projects should learn from it. Feels like it could easily turn into a tool for big players to collude and harvest retail investors.

View OriginalReply0

StablecoinGuardian

· 01-10 05:41

Voting governance sounds good, but how many people will actually participate seriously in practice? --- It's another story of decentralization of power; the key is how it plays out later --- Community decision-making is indeed satisfying, but I'm worried that a single large stakeholder's vote could determine life or death --- Whether this model can run smoothly depends mainly on participation; otherwise, it's just a display --- Giving decision-making power to the community? The prerequisite is that the community is truly rational --- It's interesting, but I still want to see how WAL's voting participation rate is this month --- Centralized decision-making is indeed terrible, but completely decentralizing isn't necessarily reliable; a balance point is enough --- On-chain voting with automatic execution sounds very blockchain, but what about risk control?

View OriginalReply0

DaoTherapy

· 01-10 05:32

Is voting the final say? Sounds great, but I'm worried it will just be the big players calling the shots again.

View OriginalReply0