🎉 Share Your 2025 Year-End Summary & Win $10,000 Sharing Rewards!
Reflect on your year with Gate and share your report on Square for a chance to win $10,000!
👇 How to Join:
1️⃣ Click to check your Year-End Summary: https://www.gate.com/competition/your-year-in-review-2025
2️⃣ After viewing, share it on social media or Gate Square using the "Share" button
3️⃣ Invite friends to like, comment, and share. More interactions, higher chances of winning!
🎁 Generous Prizes:
1️⃣ Daily Lucky Winner: 1 winner per day gets $30 GT, a branded hoodie, and a Gate × Red Bull tumbler
2️⃣ Lucky Share Draw: 10
#数字资产市场动态 $ETH $ZEC $WTC
The Ethereum developer community has recently exploded with discussions. There are voices pointing directly at a persistent issue in the crypto industry: most projects treat fundraising as the ultimate goal, instead of upholding the decentralized ideals that blockchain is supposed to embody.
What’s even more upsetting is that some developers complain about the widespread concentration of power—on certain chains, a few core leaders can change the project's direction with a single statement. How can this be called decentralization? Even Ethereum’s own governance system is being challenged, with ongoing disputes over the boundaries of the foundation and core development team’s authority.
However, the trend is shifting. The industry is exploring new directions: transforming foundations into "guardians" rather than "decision-makers," and dispersing more decision-making power to the community. This kind of republican-style governance network relies on collective voting by participants to determine the future course.
What’s your view? Do you prefer centralized efficiency or decentralized distribution? Which blockchain governance model resonates more with you?