Partnered With:

With $1.1 billion locked up, the development of SUSHI governance token is far beyond imagination

Read this article in 11 Minutes

I've never seen such crazy community voting.

Author: 0x95, rhythmical BlockBeats

From 31 August 2020,Sushi SushiSwap The heat of mining is increasing. As of this paper, the supply of Uniswap liquidity supply reached nearly $1.5 billion, and the total SushiSwap lock volume reached $1.127 billion, which is 76.7% of the Uniswap liquidity supply pool.

VC and community, go left or right

As was written in yesterday's rhythm-based Blockbeats article "SushiSwap locks $700 million and The community starts to plunder VC", the popularity of SushiSwap represents the challenge issued by the community to VC. Such as yesterday fire is called "sushi revolution preamble"Long push.

In addition, recently, a considerable number of big V's and opinion leaders have questioned some agreements/decentralized trading platforms invested by VC, and the share allocated to mining is too small, so that community capital is employed by early VC investors. It is easy to see that this is a debate that has been simmering for a long time.

The Founder of Tomochain tweeted a vote on whether VC or community capital would win, with 62.7% of the vote going to Community capital.

Govern the value of tokens

Beyond the boom came a series of points worth thinking about, beginning with the question of how to govern the value of tokens

There has long been a debate in the community about whether Aragon's tokens have any financial value beyond their voting function. DAO (decentralized organization), as a segment closely related to DeFi, has attracted a lot of market attention in recent days. Andrew Connje, the founder of YFI, famously said that his YFI tokens were worthless, and the market's reaction did not go his way. Is the market wrong?

In fact, from the perspective of Blockbeats, tokens of governance cannot simply be defined as valuable or worthless. The core and threshold for defining value lies in governing the amount owned by tokens. When an individual has only a small number of governance tokens (one coin, one right), it is insignificant to the outcome of governance. The governance token owned by an independent individual has no cash value at this time. To put it in plain English: in the traditional equity world, when one shareholder buys another shareholder and becomes the majority shareholder of a company, there is usually a premium to pay. This premium is the "governance" premium we are talking about here: what you pay more is the price of majority governance.

What is happening now also illustrates this point: the core members of the YFII community are paying to be included in SushiSwap by purchasing the right to vote in various communities. Leading contenders include Yamv2-ETH, SRM-ETH, Ren-ETH, Susd-$BASED, and so on. (Voting link) At this point, governance tokens that can be assembled to vote for the same purpose are of cash value.

In essence, this is what we see in the ballot box on the major centralized trading platforms. When the exchange platform Taiwan dollar is hot in 2019, more attention is paid to the exchange platform Taiwan Dollar repurchase mechanism, and often neglect the Taiwan Dollar as the important role of voting governance token. Today, the same logic is applied to Sushi, a token of Sushi, in the field of decentralized finance.

The discussion about DAOs continues, and much of what was thought to be wishful thinking last year is quickly becoming reality today. At last year's Devcon in Osaka, the special author of block rhythm Blockbeats wrote this thinking article about DAOIs There Hope for DAO? -- Mable & AMP; Devcon CAIAnd, in today's view, quite interesting.