Smart contracts are contractual agreements between participants of a blockchain, who cannot implicitly trust one another. They are software programs that run on top of a blockchain, and we may need to change them from time to time (e.g., to fix bugs or address new use cases). Governance protocols define the means for amending or changing these smart contracts without any centralized authority. They distribute instead the decision-making power to every user of the smart contract: Users vote on accepting or rejecting every change. The focus of this work is to evaluate whether, how, and to what extent these protocols ensure decentralized governance, the fundamental tenet of blockchains, in practice. This evaluation is crucial as smart contracts continue to transform our key, traditional, centralized institutions, particularly banking and finance. In this work, we review and characterize decentralized governance in practice, using Compound -- one of the widely used governance protocols -- as a case study. We reveal a high concentration of voting power in Compound: 10 voters hold together 57.86% of the voting power. Although proposals to change or amend the protocol (or, essentially, the application they support) receive, on average, a substantial number of votes (i.e., 89.39%) in favor, they require fewer than three voters to obtain 50% or more votes. We show that voting on Compound governance proposals can be unfairly expensive for small token holders, and also discover voting coalitions that can further marginalize these users. We plan on publishing our scripts and data set on GitHub to support reproducible research.

翻译：暂无翻译