Governance Centralization Risk from Liquid Staking Design

Just wanted to sum up some of my thoughts here.

Part of the fundamental design of the network is that both rewards and governance are tied to a long term stake.

At some point we decided that it was ok to allow systems (canister controlled neurons) which allow individuals or groups to build clever financial tools that circumvent this fundamental design.

We are now reaping what we have sewn.

The question is what should be done about it? If anything.

I personally would like to go the route of liquidating all the icp in wtn and returning it to the dao and the nicp holders and dissallowing canister controlled neurons, because i believe this was a mistake.

I dont think im going to find support for this view

I hope some people smarter than me can offer a useful solution.

I worked out where the Game theory leads and its not good. it leads to all the vp on the network coalescing in the hands of multiple liquid staking providers. And this will not lead to a healthy future for the network. Some smarter people than me figured this out a long time ago, and they campaigned for and built WTN.

The only free market way to fight back is to not buy nICP but you do so at your own detriment as everyone buying nICP will cause dilution of your liquid ICP. Its a very challenging topic.

If you read all of this and you still dont care, i got some nachos to sell you.
https://forum.dfinity.org/t/nachos-my-100-original-idea

1 Like