2026-01-10 18:23:23

ZEC dropped 30% yesterday, and my inbox instantly exploded.

"Did the project team run away?" "Is this coin completely finished?"

Well, I’ve memorized this kind of reaction. In the crypto circle, whenever the price drops, the first reaction is always that the team is in trouble. This kind of thinking has become a conditioned reflex, but honestly, what happened with Zcash is far from that simple.

I’ve been studying crypto governance for years and dare to guarantee: this is not a project collapse, but a very necessary "structural pain." From a different perspective, Zcash is going through a hurdle that all ambitious crypto projects cannot avoid — the transformation from a small workshop to a formal organization. Just like teenagers need to break free from their parents’ control to grow up, crypto projects also need to shed outdated governance constraints.

**Governance is distorted, more deadly than code vulnerabilities**

Many people put the success or failure of crypto projects entirely on technology. But I tell you, the real thunderbolt often isn’t in the code, but in governance.

The core issue with Zcash is this: two factions want the project to make money and free itself from donations, but they completely disagree on "how to make money." The destructive power of this collapse in consensus is far greater than any technical bug.

The Bank for International Settlements has long exposed a truth: the so-called "full decentralization" is an illusion; the essence of governance inevitably requires some degree of centralized decision-making. Zcash’s non-profit governance framework protected the project’s technical purity in its early days, but once the project needs funding, expansion, user recruitment, and real commercial implementation, this system becomes a huge burden.

Want funding? You have to pass through layers of donation approvals. Want rapid iteration? You have to wait for consensus from all parties. It’s like trying to run a long-distance cross-country trip with a human-powered tricycle — no matter how carefully designed, it can’t keep up with the market’s pace.

ZEC-1,21%

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.

12 Likes

Reward
12
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

rug_connoisseur

· 13h ago

Governance internal conflicts are more damaging than technical bugs; I accept this logic. It's that same "decentralization illusion" again. Well said, ZEC really needs to change its approach this time. The 30% plunge was instantly met with exit scam accusations; this reflexive condition runs too deep.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityLarry

· 13h ago

Governance factions fighting, and the coin price has to kneel. To put it simply, this is a power game.

View OriginalReply0

PhantomMiner

· 13h ago

Governance issues are even more deadly than rug risks, and this really hits home for me.

View OriginalReply0

PretendingToReadDocs

· 13h ago

Governance collapse is the real knife, while technology is actually虚的. ZEC this time is a典型 --- To put it simply, decentralization is originally a lie; sooner or later, someone has to make the decision. --- Non-profit frameworks were okay in the early days, but became a burden during fundraising and expansion. The logic is very clear. --- Disagreements between two factions are more deadly than code bugs, this hits hard. --- A 30% plunge in one day, people immediately think of跑路, reflexively. --- From small workshops to正规军, this hurdle cannot be avoided. ZEC is currently undergoing transformation. --- Layered approvals, agreements from all parties, how can efficiency not be低? No wonder it can't keep up with the rhythm. --- The so-called完全去中心化 is just an illusion; this point hits the mark. --- Structural痛苦 sounds nice, but if this pain lasts too long, it will be unbearable.

View OriginalReply0