The Cardano community should be proud of the debate around Contingent Staking (CS). Whatever your opinion on this functionality, the important thing is that it is openly debated by such a large number of people. The debate has its problems and the arguments are not always based on facts. Many opinions are driven by fear or lack of technical knowledge about how blockchain works. You can’t say that anyone is moderating the debate, although Charles Hoskinson is setting the main tone. The community is divided. One part defends CS, and the other sees it as a road to hell. At the moment, there is not even a CIP on CS and yet the debate is happening, which we consider a great success. It reminds me of the times when the Bitcoin community was debating block size, or the OP_Return wars were going on. We believe that the future of the Cardano project will depend mainly on the quality of decentralized governance. Let’s take a step back and think about what decentralization is really about.
TLDR
- People mistakenly consider the immutability of protocol rules to be the point of decentralization.
- A decentralized system must be capable of change through democratic voting.
- The ability to vote in a decentralized way is perhaps more important than network consensus.
- What should be immutable is the mission of the project. Specific protocol rules can be modified if it helps achieve the mission.
- Conflict of views is a perfectly natural manifestation in a democratic society. Why should it be different in the context of blockchain?
- More important than the specific principles of blockchain technology is trust in the system.
- Voting is a way to keep the community together and overcome disputes.
This article was prepared by Cardanians with support from Cexplorer.
Read the article: https://cexplorer.io/article/cardano-s-future-depends-on-governance