LayerZero community vote did not reach the quorum; the fee mechanism will be proposed again after 6 months.

NullWhisperer · 2025-12-27T05:46:10+00:00

LayerZero community's recent vote did not pass due to insufficient participation, failing to decide whether to activate the protocol fee mechanism. The next vote will be held in 6 months, and discussions will continue. If the fee mechanism is activated, the fees will be converted into ZRO tokens and burned, potentially increasing its scarcity.

NullWhisperer

2025-12-27 05:46:10

Abstract generation in progress

【BitPush】LayerZero community’s recent vote ended in failure. The original plan was to decide whether to activate the protocol fee mechanism—charging no more than the verification and execution costs for each LayerZero message. The issue was that the number of community members participating in the vote did not meet the quorum requirement, so the proposal ultimately failed.

According to the plan, the next vote will be held in 6 months. This gives the community ample time to re-discuss and evaluate the proposal. If the fee mechanism is finally activated, all collected fees will be automatically converted into ZRO tokens and then burned directly. This mechanism is designed to enhance the scarcity of ZRO, which could be beneficial for long-term holders.

ZRO9,55%

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.

22 Likes

Reward
22
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SchrodingersPaper

· 2025-12-30 05:09

Insufficient quorum leads to abortion, this is what decentralization looks like haha. Come back in 6 months? By then I’ll probably have forgotten. --- Wait, destroying ZRO to create scarcity? I feel like I’ve heard this trick countless times. --- Can't even gather enough people for voting. Where is the promised community governance? It’s already like this now, how will it work later? --- Long-term holders benefit? It looks more like an excuse for the whales to cut leeks. Being honest, what’s the point? --- 6 months is too long. By then, this thing might be completely cooled off. Anyway, I’m not hopeful.

View OriginalReply0

FUD_Whisperer

· 2025-12-29 12:34

The quorum wasn't reached, so the vote failed? That's hilarious. Is community participation this low? --- Vote again in six months, and you'll probably have to brainwash everyone again by then. --- Destroying ZRO to create scarcity—I've heard this excuse way too many times. --- Can the issue really be executed, or is it just another PPT promise? --- What does low participation mean? Nobody's interested. --- In six months, the season will be over, and the market will have already changed.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityWitch

· 2025-12-27 06:16

ngl the quorum miss is lowkey the most layerzero thing ever... 6 months till round two? that's a lot of time to brew some real alpha on this tokenomics transmutation ritual they're cooking up

Reply0

BlockBargainHunter

· 2025-12-27 06:14

The quorum was not met, this voting really sucks, it seems the community doesn't really care either. Vote again in half a year, forget it, I'll just accumulate some ZRO first, the burn mechanism is definitely beneficial for us long-term holders. This failure is actually a good thing, it gives everyone more room for thought, don't rush to implement the fee mechanism. With such low participation in the voting, LayerZero needs to reflect on community governance. Wait, burning ZRO to increase scarcity? I've seen this trick before, let's see how many people buy into it in the end. The fee mechanism will be implemented sooner or later, just a matter of time, anyway I won't sell.

View OriginalReply0

orphaned_block

· 2025-12-27 06:10

Not enough people to meet the quorum, how's the community enthusiasm? Let's wait another six months; this pace is painfully slow. Destroying ZRO sounds good, but I'm worried it might get shelved again. The failed vote might actually be a good thing, at least it didn't rush to cut. Six months is enough to revise the plan; let's see how they adjust afterward.

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunterWang

· 2025-12-27 06:07

Insufficient legal quorum is indeed awkward; this is the cost of decentralization. Try again in 6 months, and we'll see if we can gather enough people by then... The destruction mechanism sounds good, but ultimately it depends on how the transaction fee is set.

View OriginalReply0