Important Solana Governance Proposal Not Passed: Showcasing High Community Participation

Recently, a widely discussed Solana governance proposal SIMD 0228 failed to pass. The proposal aimed to maintain a 50% staking rate by dynamically adjusting the inflation rate and to reduce the issuance speed of SOL in the long term. Despite the voting participation rate reaching a historic high, close to 50% of the total token supply, the final proportion of supporting votes did not meet the required 66.67% supermajority threshold.

The background of this proposal is that Solana has gradually returned to calm after experiencing a memecoin frenzy. The weekly trading volume has sharply decreased from nearly $100 billion at the beginning of the year to less than $10 billion, which is below the level seen during the early rise of memecoins. During this transition period, Solana faces the challenge of repositioning itself.

The proposal has sparked intense debate within the community. Supporters argue that the current fixed inflation model is a "foolish emission" that does not take into account the actual economic activities and security demands of the network. They advocate for reducing unnecessary token issuance to lower inflation costs, release capital to promote the development of the DeFi ecosystem, and reduce the "leaky bucket effect" to enhance the autonomy of the ecosystem.

Opponents are concerned that rushing through this proposal may have a significant impact on different participants, especially potentially harming the interests of small validators, thereby affecting the level of decentralization of Solana. They are calling for a more comprehensive and in-depth discussion and argumentation.

Although the proposal was not passed, this governance process is seen as a victory. It demonstrates the high level of engagement from the Solana community and the open and transparent discussion atmosphere. From the proposal being raised to the completion of voting took less than two months, reflecting the efficient execution capacity of the ecosystem.

This incident reflects that Solana, after experiencing a period of prosperity, is facing a choice between institutional adoption and continuing to build consumer applications, with contradictions in benefit distribution beginning to emerge. Although the proposal did not pass, this process provided valuable experience for future governance practices and demonstrated the vitality and openness of the Solana ecosystem.