2026-01-09 00:21:18

Privacy coin industry hits another big news. The CEO of ECC, the development team of Zcash, announced an unexpected decision today—due to disagreements over fund allocation with the non-profit organization Bootstrap behind the project, core members have decided to resign collectively and start anew to continue developing the project. Once the news broke, the ZEC token dropped by 20%. Although the team emphasized that the protocol itself is fine, this turmoil still served as a wake-up call for the entire industry.

This actually reflects a fundamental contradiction faced by crypto projects. Blockchain originally aimed to solve the problem of removing unnecessary centralized intermediaries, allowing everyone to build trust through technical means in a distributed environment. But when it comes to project governance, things become particularly tricky.

The key issue at hand: how should the power be divided between the development team and the DAO? How should the rules for profit sharing be set to align both parties' goals, rather than each doing their own thing? How can we ensure the long-term healthy development of the project?

Honestly, so far, there haven't been any particularly successful benchmark cases in the industry. This is not only a Zcash problem but a challenge that the entire ecosystem is pondering. What are your thoughts on this?

ZEC13,72%

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.

17 Likes

Reward
17
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

LayerZeroJunkie

· 01-11 21:52

Old tricks again, the quick turnaround in fund allocation is really fast --- Zcash once again proves that decentralized governance is much harder than writing code --- A 20% drop is not unfair; this internal conflict deals a huge blow to project confidence --- Where is the promised distributed trust? Turns out the money wasn't properly divided and it fell apart --- Ha, ECC collectively leaving and doing it themselves again—this plot repeats itself every few projects --- DAO and development teams will never figure out a proper way to compete; it's a false proposition --- It feels like the entire privacy coin sector is starting to have problems, not just Zcash --- When fund allocation negotiations fall apart, people just run away, claiming the protocol is fine is all talk

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeGazer

· 01-11 02:09

Another "decentralized" project disaster scene, isn't it ironic? --- The recent drop of ZEC is quite severe, mainly due to issues with money causing disputes. --- Frankly, someone still needs to make the final decision; completely DAO governance simply doesn't work. --- Did ECC's team leave and start anew? It seems like it will split into two projects. --- Privacy coins themselves are not the problem; the issue is human greed which has no boundaries. --- I just want to ask, does Bootstrap still control the main chain now? --- Decentralized governance is inherently a false proposition; there must be a core team. --- This incident with ZEC actually serves as a lesson for all project teams: the rules for money distribution must be agreed upon in advance.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropDreamBreaker

· 01-09 20:21

Another major DAO governance collapse, ZEC is really unfortunate this time --- That's why I always say decentralization is a paradox; the more decentralized, the easier it is to fall apart --- If the money issue can't be resolved, even the best technology is useless --- Wait, are they planning to fork a new project? What about the token holders? --- Privacy coins are already plagued by misfortune, and this just makes it worse --- Where is the promised decentralization? In the end, human issues are the hardest to solve --- A 20% drop is pretty harsh; it looks like the little guys are going to get reaped again --- I just want to know what Bootstrap has to say? --- No wonder everyone is turning to Monero; the internal conflicts in ZEC are too frequent --- So fundamentally, it's still a matter of poor profit distribution design; they should learn from Curve's model

View OriginalReply0

ChainDoctor

· 01-09 00:37

Another story of "dreams coming true in reality" haha The issue of power distribution is the Achilles' heel of crypto. It's politely called decentralization, but in reality, someone still has to make the decisions. When conflicts of interest arise, everything falls apart. I find the 20% drop in ZEC quite satisfying. Time to give it a good lesson.

View OriginalReply0

DegenApeSurfer

· 01-09 00:28

It's another issue with fund allocation; the development team and DAO can never get along.

View OriginalReply0

liquidation_watcher

· 01-09 00:22

It's all about the money again, and in the end, it still fell apart. --- DAO governance is just a false proposition; ultimately, it's still about power. --- ZEC dropped 20%, this move was really brilliant. --- After shouting for decentralization for so long, it still ends up being about money distribution, which is a bit embarrassing. --- Core members leaving to start anew? I know this routine well; are they going to split off a new coin again? --- They say the protocol has no issues, but with the token dropping like this, who would believe it? --- Bootstrap and ECC fighting, in the end, retail investors are the ones hurt; it's an old routine. --- Developer teams vs. foundations—this conflict can't be resolved. The entire privacy coin sector needs to reflect. --- Fund allocation is truly the Achilles' heel of all DAO projects; no one has broken through yet. --- A 20% drop isn't a big deal; waiting to see the emergence of split coins later is the real celebration.

View OriginalReply0

MultiSigFailMaster

· 01-09 00:21

It's another internal conflict; ZEC is really underperforming this time.

View OriginalReply0

WhaleWatcher

· 01-09 00:21

It's the same old trick of fund allocation, tired of it --- Why is ZEC causing internal conflicts again? Privacy coins already lack influence --- Basically, it's how much the idealism of DAO clashes with reality --- The wave of resignations has begun; how disheartening it must be to cause an overall run --- Poor distribution of the cake is a chronic issue in crypto; nothing new --- A 20% drop is still okay; I thought it would be worse --- Decentralization is actually more troublesome than centralization, isn't it? --- Splitting development projects has been tried by many, ending in chaos --- No one has fully thought through the concept of checks and balances, including those VC firms --- The privacy coin track itself has issues; ZEC is just an example

View OriginalReply0