A well-known Web3 protocol recently proposed an important governance proposal called UIP-13. At first glance, it might seem like just another new feature proposal, but in fact, it marks the end of an era for the existing architecture.
Since its inception, the protocol's early governance structure was quite effective. However, as the ecosystem grew, issues gradually emerged—those designs that once suited small teams no longer kept pace with development. So the question is no longer "Can the protocol work?" but rather "Is the current internal architecture suitable for the next step?"
UIP-13 is answering that question. What is its core? Unification. It consolidates dispersed governance weights into a single reference standard—the USUAL token.
What does this mean? A shift from a complex multi-track system to a single governance framework. Token holders have clearer boundaries of authority, and ecosystem participants can more easily understand the decision-making process. This simplification is not a weakening but a move toward more efficient and transparent governance.
The evolution of a protocol often follows this pattern—not constantly piling on new features, but re-examining the infrastructure at critical junctures. This proposal is precisely that critical juncture.
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
2
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
BearMarketMonk
· 2025-12-20 09:48
Coming again to integrate and reorganize? Honestly, it's still a compromise of centralization.
---
Unifying multi-track systems into a single standard sounds transparent, but it actually means more concentrated power.
---
I've seen this merge governance system tactic many times; the key is how the liquidity of the USUAL token will perform later.
---
Early decentralized designs were rejected, and now they want to rebuild order? It feels like a repeated trial and error.
---
If this proposal can truly improve efficiency, that would be good; I'm just worried that ultimately big players will still have the say.
---
Everyone can talk about simplifying processes, but the hard part is avoiding control by a few.
---
From multi-track to single-track, it seems like progress but is actually paving the way for the next round of fundraising.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainTalker
· 2025-12-17 20:45
actually, consolidating governance into a single token standard sounds cleaner on paper than it plays out... game theory says incentive misalignment still happens, just harder to spot now
A well-known Web3 protocol recently proposed an important governance proposal called UIP-13. At first glance, it might seem like just another new feature proposal, but in fact, it marks the end of an era for the existing architecture.
Since its inception, the protocol's early governance structure was quite effective. However, as the ecosystem grew, issues gradually emerged—those designs that once suited small teams no longer kept pace with development. So the question is no longer "Can the protocol work?" but rather "Is the current internal architecture suitable for the next step?"
UIP-13 is answering that question. What is its core? Unification. It consolidates dispersed governance weights into a single reference standard—the USUAL token.
What does this mean? A shift from a complex multi-track system to a single governance framework. Token holders have clearer boundaries of authority, and ecosystem participants can more easily understand the decision-making process. This simplification is not a weakening but a move toward more efficient and transparent governance.
The evolution of a protocol often follows this pattern—not constantly piling on new features, but re-examining the infrastructure at critical junctures. This proposal is precisely that critical juncture.