Solana's first governance vote concludes: Why did SGP-003 cause such a huge controversy?

Author: Gu Yu, ChainCatcher

Solana is undergoing a landmark governance experiment.

On August 23, Solana's first-ever formal on-chain governance vote was launched, with three proposals—SGP-0001, SGP-0002, and SGP-0003—simultaneously entering the voting stage. These proposals cover the governance framework, the SOL inflation mechanism, and the transaction fee structure, respectively.

This not only signifies that Solana is beginning to delegate some major decisions to validators and stakers, but also that network upgrades, previously primarily coordinated by core developers and ecosystem organizations, are entering a phase of open competition.

Around 11 PM tonight, the voting on these three governance proposals officially concluded. Proposals SGP-0001 and SGP-0002 both reached the minimum one-third voter turnout (the proportion of all valid SOL staked users voting) and the minimum two-thirds support rate (the proportion of support votes among all votes). They will now officially enter the implementation phase. However, SGP-0003, which involves restructuring network fees, failed to pass, with a support rate of 54.3%, slightly below the minimum threshold of 66.6%. Meanwhile, the list of dissenting votes includes a number of well-known projects such as Jupiter, Forward Industries, Anagram Staking, and Solana Company.

So, what do SGP-0001 and SGP-0002 mean for the Solana ecosystem? Why did SGP-0003 suffer such huge controversy on social media and fail to pass?

SGP-0001: The First Formal Governance Framework

Solana previously did not have a clear and standardized on-chain governance procedure similar to Ethereum's governance system.