The Ethereum co-founder has often advocated for projects to de-vote coins in DeFi and DeGov as it would allow smaller holders to participate in governance.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has shown support for the new Optimism governance structure, noting that proposals such as using the OP token to pay for gas show a “clear representation of the interests of non-token holders.”

Ethereum’s Tier 2 scaling solution on Wednesday launched the first round of its long-awaited OP token issuance as part of its new governance project Optimism Collective.

Optimism’s new governance structure includes two parties dubbed the “House of Tokens” and the “House of Citizens.” The first consists of OP governance token holders and the second consists of “soulbound”, non-transferable, non-fungible citizenship token (NFT) token holders.

While it’s unclear if Buterin fully agrees with Thursday’s suggestion to use OP’s governance token to pay for gas, or if he’s just glad such a discussion is taking place, he noted on Twitter on Friday:

The two sides primarily pursue different goals: Token House focuses on project incentives, protocol upgrades and funding, while Citizens’ House focuses on retrospective funding of public goods.

The duo also share managerial decisions about network parameters and granting new citizenships to the Citizens’ House, which Buterin seems to appreciate in this case.

According to Optimism, the number of citizens in the Civic House will grow over time, and “the mechanism for assigning citizenship will be determined by the Foundation with input from the House of Tokens.”

On several occasions Buterin has expressed his thoughts that the crypto sector should “go beyond voting for coins” into decentralized finance (DeFi) or decentralized governance (DeGov) due to the risk of whale governance token holders dominate the voting process. . Buterin argues that this can often result in whales focusing in the short term on approving proposals aimed at boosting the price of certain assets.

Such a method could result in small platform owners and users not having a say in the DeGov process, or what Buterin describes as a lack of interest from non-token hodlers.

As for the OP’s gas fee proposal, which itself posted to the Optimism Governance forum for ideas and feedback yesterday, sentiment in the community appears to be mixed.

Gas Payment Proposal: Optimism Management Forum
While many made short and blunt comments about consent, usually stating that it would make the OP more helpful, many others took the time to clearly explain why they were against the idea.

Related: Balancer launches on Ethereum L2 network

One member, Ketik, explained: “I don’t think that’s a good idea. Burning the right to vote in the governance structure seems counterproductive,” User Vrede explained:

“Optimism is synonymous with EVM. Accepting OP tokens as gas means giving up EVM equivalence. In addition, Optimism has to pay Ethereum mainnet fees in ETH. How is the OPETH transformation performed?”
User Massedai said that “this is a premature change to a system that hasn’t yet started to work the way Optimism envisioned it,” and suggested that the project seeks to value the token through “the profitability.” of the ecosystem and not by quick steps” Try to pump the token.

Source: CoinTelegraph