Vitalik Buterin questions the new governance proposal of Zcash

Source: Criptonoticias Original Title: Vitalik Buterin questions the new governance proposal of Zcash Original Link: The Zcash community is analyzing structural changes that include a fund managed by holders of its currency, seeking to redefine the block reward distribution scheme.

“I hope that Zcash withstands the dark hand of token voting. Token voting is bad in many ways; I believe it is worse than the current state of Zcash. Privacy is exactly the kind of thing that will erode over time if left in the hands of the average token holder,” wrote Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, on November 30.

Your message was inserted into an active debate within the Zcash ecosystem, where its community is analyzing structural changes to its governance and funding model.

According to the perspective of the co-founder of Ethereum, delegating governance decisions to mechanisms where each vote depends on the amount of coins held could create incentives that do not always favor the preservation of privacy.

Proposals under debate within Zcash and a conflict, according to Vitalik

The Zcash community discusses various proposals aimed at adjusting how decisions are made and how development is funded.

Among them stands out ZIP-1016, a Zcash Improvement Proposal, which seeks to redefine the block reward distribution scheme.

ZIP-1016 proposes to divide part of those rewards between two funds: one managed by community grants and the other controlled by the holders of ZEC (, the currency of Zcash ).

In this last one, 12% of the rewards per block would be assigned, which implies that those who hold ZEC could directly influence the fate of that capital.

The initiative only establishes how funding is distributed, but not how decisions will be made. Instead of setting a definitive method, it leaves that decision for a future stage, where the community will need to agree on which governance model to use.

That point is key to understanding Vitalik's warning. If the process ends up adopting a token voting scheme where those with more coins gain more decision-making power, it could open the door for a small group to steer the project's priorities.

That void is the center of the debate, because the fund controlled by the holders could lead to a “one token, one vote” system.

According to Buterin, this mechanism does not fit with a project whose central goal is privacy. In his view, large holders tend to focus on short-term returns, while protecting privacy requires decisions that preserve guarantees even if they do not generate immediate benefits.

Zcash was built on zero-knowledge proofs, a technique that allows validating transactions without revealing sensitive data. To uphold that promise in the long term, Buterin argues that governance should not depend on individual economic weight.

The concrete fact is that ZIP-1016 leaves the discussion open. It will be the community that decides whether the fund will be managed by token voting, delegates, hybrid models, or another approach. The process is underway and the outcome will define the direction of governance in Zcash.