2025-12-23 05:21:56

Where exactly is the L2 scaling solution still lacking in terms of Decentralization? Why does the community keep saying that they are still in the "training wheels" phase?

This issue is worth discussing in depth. The current mainstream L2s (such as Arbitrum, Optimism, etc.) do indeed show obvious signs of centralization in terms of verification mechanisms, sequencer control, and governance participation. Sequencers are often operated by a single entity, with transaction ordering rights held by a few; the threshold for validators is high, leading to insufficient participation; on-chain governance is decentralized but its effectiveness is yet to be evaluated.

These are not technical defects, but rather an inevitable choice in the development stage—while pursuing performance, project parties need more time to improve decentralization infrastructure, increase the number of participants, and optimize incentive mechanisms. From this perspective, the term "training rounds" indeed reflects the current state of the L2 ecosystem.

What do you think? Where is the Decentralization bottleneck of L2? Let's discuss.

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.

20 Likes

Reward
20
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

RuntimeError

· 2025-12-26 04:09

The sorter part is definitely the biggest joke. To put it simply, the project team acts as both the police and the judge, and we have to trust them.

View OriginalReply0

ShibaMillionairen't

· 2025-12-24 09:56

In simple terms, the sorter is like the current big boss, holding the power to determine transaction order and execution. It appears decentralized, but in reality, the project team still has the final say. The validator threshold is extremely high, and ordinary people can't get in at all.

View OriginalReply0

DeFiVeteran

· 2025-12-23 05:51

It's really ironic that the sorter is in the hands of a few people; the so-called decentralized L2 has instead become a new centralized tool. In simple terms, it means that the technology hasn't kept up with the ambition, and it's still the project party that is leading the pace.

View OriginalReply0

WalletWhisperer

· 2025-12-23 05:49

sequencers are basically just custodians cosplaying as decentralization... the whole validator threshold thing is just gatekeeping with extra steps tbh. watching the behavioral patterns on-chain, most governance participation reads like theater—whales moving pieces, retail pretending it matters. accumulation phase still in full swing imo.

Reply0

OnchainDetective

· 2025-12-23 05:47

According to on-chain data tracking, the issue of the concentration of sorting power has been pointed out by people long ago. At that time, I felt that this trap was too slick—saying things like "inevitable choice of the development stage" is just a grand excuse for centralization.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-e19e9c10

· 2025-12-23 05:30

The sorter is, to put it simply, new wine in an old bottle; it's still that trap of centralization. As long as it is controlled by a few people, trading will not be free.

View OriginalReply0