MultiversX Co-Founder Highlights Solana's Insider Token Distribution

Anatoly Yakovenko explained decentralization tests as objective rather than subjective concepts. He said a true decentralized network must avoid minority blocking majority decisions.

On May 24, 2025, MultiversX co-founder Lucian Mincu publicly responded on X. He was following up to a comment by Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko about decentralization tests. Yakovenko had stated that decentralization should be an objective and measurable property.

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko defined decentralization tests as objective rather than subjective concepts. He said a true decentralized network must avoid minority blocking majority decisions. Also, participants should exit or fork freely without network barriers. This approach aimed to measure decentralization as a technical and quantifiable property. Yakovenko intended these guidelines to unify definitions within the blockchain field. He believed clear standards could improve network trust and design decisions. The post itself was widely viewed by developers and community researchers online. His criteria aimed to bring clarity and reduce debate over network models.

Anatoly Yakovenko set out objective criteria for evaluating network structure.

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko defined decentralization tests as objective rather than subjective concepts. He said a true decentralized network must avoid minority blocking majority decisions.

"Participants can exit or fork freely without any network barriers," Yakovenko explained. He highlighted that these properties enable measuring decentralization as a technical and quantifiable property.

"We can objectively identify and classify decentralized networks according to these criteria," he stated. Yakovenko intended these guidelines to unify definitions within the blockchain field. He believed that clear standards could improve network trust and design decisions.

"This will help in making better network design decisions and drive towards building truly decentralized protocols," Yakovenko added. The post itself was viewed widely by developers and community researchers online. His criteria aimed to bring clarity and reduce discussion over network models.

However, Mincu challenged those ideas by pointing to what he saw as Solana’s decentralization shortcomings. He argued that over 48% of tokens were allocated to insiders and venture investors.

“This wasn’t disclosed until after mainnet launch and is an imbalance of power that undermines decentralization ideals. Especially when considering that hardware requirements to run a Solana validator node were demanding, even in 2021, shortly after launch, Solana Labs was recommending twelve-core processors and one hundred twenty-eight gigabytes of RAM for optimal performance for a validator node. These strict requirements placed a significant financial barrier to entry for individuals or organizations wishing to participate in securing the network at the validator level.

“The thinking went that if you want to be a good citizen and participate in securing the network, you should buy some SOL and set up a validator node. But the operational costs were also quite high. At that time, validators needed to pay around one SOL each day during the 2021 operations to cover network fees and keep the validator running smoothly. One SOL was about two hundred dollars in USD at that time. These high costs, combined with technical demands, limited validator participation to a smaller set of entities who could handle both the financial burden and technical maintenance. This dynamic, unfortunately, conflicted with the spirit of open participation and decentralization that many networks strive for.

“The community saw that these economic barriers hindered fair participation in Solana’s network. This condition contrasted sharply with decentralization goals set by many networks. Community members observed that few small stakeholders could feasibly meet such operational costs. This observation sparked broader discussion on network equity and control.

Mincu's point about significant token allocation imbalance was reinforced by historical research. A 2021 Messari Research Hub report highlighted insider holdings of over forty eight percent. In contrast, other protocols like Ethereum and Cardano showed insider stakes around fifteen to seventeen percent. This disparity raised questions about fairness in governance and decision making. Critics argued that concentrated holdings could unduly influence upgrade votes and emission control decisions. The report compared decentralization metrics across major layer-one blockchains. This comparison highlighted the challenge of balancing performance and decentralization. This data prompted fresh community discussions on network equity and control.

Mincu also highlighted widespread concerns about governance in Solana's ecosystem. He said that bridges and liquidity pools were largely dominated by a handful of large players. This concentration of power and influence limited the ability of smaller stakeholders to engage meaningfully in network decision making.

“This unbalanced participation could lead to emergency upgrades or critical decisions being made in a way that didn't reflect the broader community sentiment. As a result, community members expressed worries that this model created risks for network adaptability and trust in the long term. Mincu suggested that these factors contrasted with the ideal of inclusive governance in decentralized systems. He said that ultimately this discussion highlighted the trade-offs between speed, scale, and decentralization integrity in blockchain networks. Observers viewed this issue as a key test for blockchain governance in the evolving landscape of Web3. The conversation sparked discussion on best practices for protocol rules and community engagement in decision making.

This exchange highlighted the ongoing challenge of