What Prevents a Few Large Holders from Controlling a Project’s Governance?

Various mechanisms are employed to prevent whale control. These include quadratic voting, where a user's voting power increases less than linearly with their stake, and delegation to limit individual influence.

Time-locks on large token transfers can also slow down sudden governance attacks. Additionally, a well-distributed token supply across many unique addresses inherently dilutes the power of any single large holder.

Community participation and transparent governance processes are also crucial deterrents.

How Does Token Vesting Schedules Affect Initial Governance Control?
What Is the Role of “Decentralized Autonomous Organizations” (DAOs) in Preventing Token Concentration?
What Is the Risk of ‘Whale’ Concentration in Governance Token Distribution?
How Does ‘Vote Delegation’ Work in a DAO Governance System?
What Are the Primary Alternatives to Quadratic Voting for Fair DAO Governance?
How Is Quadratic Funding Different from Quadratic Voting?
How Does Delegation of Voting Power Impact the Concentration of Governance Influence?
What Are the Trade-Offs of Using Quadratic Voting for Proposal Funding versus Simple Majority Voting?

Glossar