Solana promotes a new decentralized policy: for every new validator added, three nodes dependent on foundation support will be removed. Is it a reform or a crisis? On April 23, @solana
The foundation announced a reform of the delegation mechanism: any validator operating on the mainnet for 18 months and with external staking of less than 1000 SOL will be prioritized for removal, to reduce the network's dependence on foundation delegation and enhance validator independence. According to data, about 62% of Solana validators accept foundation staking, with up to 51% unable to meet the reform requirements and may face expulsion. The foundation has previously supported small and medium-sized nodes through staking matching and cost subsidies, but as support gradually withdraws, the survival threshold rises rapidly. Community estimates suggest that maintaining node operations requires at least 3500 SOL and up to $45,000 annually, and small nodes losing delegation may be forced to exit. Although this policy aims for decentralization, it may actually lead to further concentration of network structure towards a few large nodes. In the context of tightening regulations, Solana's move is also interpreted as paving the way for SOL ETFs, responding to the core criticism of 'insufficient decentralization'. After the new SEC chairman took office, 72 crypto ETFs are awaiting approval, and SOL is seen as a key candidate for breakthroughs. On the other hand, institutions are entering the market in large numbers, with SOL Strategies securing a $500 million financing plan to run self-operated nodes, and DeFi Development Corp announcing long-term staking of over 310,000 SOL. From the SIMD-0228 controversy to the current 'one in, three out' policy, Solana is accelerating a superficial reform of 'decentralization', which effectively raises the threshold for small and medium-sized nodes. The real issue may not be 'how to quantify decentralization', but whether Solana is willing to create space for more nodes to survive.
