When it comes to the long-term development of crypto protocols, governance models often determine how far they can go. Take the Walrus protocol as an example; it hands the steering wheel of the future to $WAL holders, driving the protocol's evolution through a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO).



**How to Calculate the Treasury Account**

The transaction fees generated by the protocol's operation are partially allocated to the community treasury. As a $WAL holder, you have the right to participate in voting: Should this money be used to support ecological projects, promote liquidity mining, hire security audit teams, or be used to buy back and burn tokens? Each choice directly impacts the community's economic cycle.

**Parameter Adjustment: Who Decides**

What should be the fee for privacy transactions? How should storage services be priced? How are staking rewards for different node types allocated? These seemingly technical questions actually shape the protocol's competitiveness. Setting parameters reasonably gives the protocol more vitality; unreasonable adjustments may weaken its market appeal. This power is also held by the community.

**Decisions on Technical Roadmap**

More importantly, decisions on technical upgrades. For example, whether to upgrade from ring signatures to zk-SNARKs for privacy solutions? Should support be added for new storage types? Is cross-chain integration into other ecosystems necessary? These major decisions are not made by a single team but require community voting. A single vote can determine the protocol's future tech stack.

**Thresholds for Ecosystem Collaboration**

Which wallets, oracles, or cross-chain bridges to establish official partnerships with? Which DeFi protocols to integrate? These ecosystem collaboration decisions also require community consensus. It’s not just a strategic issue but also relates to the protocol’s openness and usability.

**Why Participate in Governance**

Participating in governance is not just a right but an active measure to protect the value of your assets. An active, rational, and forward-looking governance community is the soft power behind the long-term success of projects like Walrus. For investors, thoroughly researching a protocol’s governance history and community atmosphere is a key indicator of its long-term potential. By observing community voting participation, discussion quality, and decision execution efficiency, you can roughly assess whether this project is worth engaging with.
WAL-6.72%
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.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
WalletAnxietyPatientvip
· 12h ago
In simple terms, governance is a struggle for "decision-making power." Only communities with high participation can thrive. Really, does the treasury money get spent just because someone says so? Walrus's gameplay sounds good, but I wonder if large holders have too much influence during actual voting. Parameter adjustment rights are in the community's hands... The information gap is huge. Can ordinary token holders really vote for good proposals? Cross-chain is a critical decision. One wrong step could be disastrous. DAO governance looks democratic, but whales' voices are the loudest. Can voting participation reflect the project's quality? This logic seems sound. Protocol upgrade direction voting... feels more complicated than choosing stocks.
View OriginalReply0
CommunityWorkervip
· 12h ago
The voting in the treasury really tests human nature. Is it to invest in the ecosystem or to buy back and burn? Every time, you can see what the community truly wants.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeCrybabyvip
· 12h ago
Honestly, how the treasury spends money doesn't really matter to us retail investors; it's all controlled by a few whales. Governance voting sounds nice, but in reality, it's mostly just a formality. No matter how reasonable the parameter adjustments are, the key is whether the team has foresight. The real issue is participation. No matter how good a DAO is, if the community isn't active, it's useless. Can major decisions like cross-chain be decided by voting? I doubt it. The team probably already has a predetermined plan.
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekConfessionvip
· 12h ago
They're all fake; the key is who is really voting.
View OriginalReply0
ValidatorVikingvip
· 12h ago
governance theater without uptime metrics is just vibes, ngl. where's the slashing risk analysis tho
Reply0
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)