2025-12-27 08:23:47

LayerZero Foundation's third public vote on the fee switch has concluded. Since the number of participants did not meet the predetermined legal minimum (quorum), the protocol's fee collection mechanism remains turned off and will not be activated for now.

This is already a series of consecutive voting attempts. The official timeline indicates that the next step will be to wait until the first half of the year—organizing a new round of voting after six months. It seems that there are still disagreements within the community regarding whether to activate the fee mechanism, and enough consensus has not yet been reached.

Similar governance deadlocks occur from time to time in various DAOs. Users both hope that the protocol can self-improve and hold reservations about fee collection. The situation with LayerZero this time, to some extent, reflects the challenges Web3 projects face in balancing community interests and sustainable development.

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ProposalManiac

· 12-27 08:53

Three times failing to meet the quorum, what does that mean? It means no one cares at all. Wait another six months to invest again. I think it's just dragging out the time. MakerDAO already figured out this problem, but LayerZero is still dithering. Closing the fee mechanism isn't really good for the ecosystem, but forcing it through isn't the answer either. This is the curse of decentralization—the result of giving everyone a say is often that no one can take control.

View OriginalReply0

StakeTillRetire

· 12-27 08:51

Even after three consecutive votes, the quorum wasn't met. How guilty does that make you feel? Wait six months? Who will still remember this then? The community doesn't want to pay fees, what else can be done? Honestly, this kind of deadlock looks pretty uncomfortable. Wanting money but also afraid of shooting yourself in the foot.

View OriginalReply0

BearWhisperGod

· 12-27 08:49

Insufficient number of voters? Ha, it's the same old story Waiting another half year? The LZ community really can't get it together Honestly, no one wants to pay fees, who would be willing, right? Continuous losses are indeed embarrassing... but I think it's okay without fees, just focus on building a good product first A typical DAO vicious cycle, fighting among themselves This is the cost of decentralization... efficiency is definitely lower

View OriginalReply0

MelonField

· 12-27 08:35

If I can't get it done after three attempts, the community is really hard to unify --- Wait, invest again after half a year? This operation is a bit sluggish --- Basically, some people just want to exploit the system, no one wants to be cut off --- Fees have always been a sensitive topic, no wonder it always fails to reach the quorum --- This is the cost of decentralization, efficiency is indeed worrying --- I just want to know, if this keeps dragging on, how can the protocol's sustainability be guaranteed? --- I'm a bit annoyed by this repeated voting process, can't it be done in one go? --- It's just a conflict of interest, big players don't want to pay fees, small players don't want to either, so it gets shelved --- The original poster is really stuck this time, it's a bit difficult --- Again, quorum issue... This kind of DAO governance is really a big pit

View OriginalReply0