Hello everyone, I am sour jujube.
Many people in the circle overlook a fact:
The essence of the protocol is a 'long-term collaborative system.'
But most chains lack the ecological structure to support 'long-term agreements.'
It's not that agreements can't work,
It's that the governance and ecological structure of the chain are not suitable for long-termism.
Linea happens to be the L2 most suitable for long-term agreements.
① Long-term agreements require a 'slow and stable environment'
Long-term agreements have several common characteristics:
The development cycle is long (12–36 months)
Parameters cannot change frequently
High governance transparency is needed
A stable roadmap is required
Ecosystem certainty is needed
Slow-paced upgrades are needed
Most L2s are too fast, too anxious, too aggressive.
Suitable for short-cycle projects, not suitable for long-term agreements.
Linea is just the opposite—
Stable, slow, governance is very clear.
② What does a long-term agreement fear? Any changes
Chain's:
Gas adjustment
Parameter update
Pledge logic
Underlying upgrade
Ecosystem incentives
Any change could disrupt the agreement.
Linea changes very little, and that is its greatest advantage.
③ Linea's governance structure gives the agreement 'predictability for the future'
Predictability for the future is the core asset of long-term agreements.
Linea provides:
Transparent governance process
Public roadmap
Principles do not change easily
Participation mechanism is stable
Risk management model is mature
This is the environment that all long-term agreements value the most.
④ Long-term agreements will naturally gather in the most stable places
You will find
Risk control system category
Infrastructure category
Data category
Index category
Settlement category
Enterprise service category
These projects will increasingly tend to choose Linea.
Why?
Because it is the most stable L2.
What do you think a 'long-term agreement' fears the most? Uncertainty? Governance chaos? Unstable incentives? Technological fluctuations?
