Critique and Proposal on MultiversX Emissions Distribution
1. Introduction
This document provides a logical and ethical critique of the current MultiversX emissions proposal and presents a concrete recommendation to safeguard network integrity and participant fairness.
2. Logical and Ethical Critique of the Emissions Proposal
The MultiversX emissions proposal fails both logically and ethically because it allocates a significant portion of staking rewards (~50%) to external entities that are not participants in the protocol, instead of rewarding validators and stakers who secure the network.
2.1 Logical Invalidity
-
Misalignment with value creation: Emissions are intended to reward actors who actively contribute to network security and consensus. Diverting half of all emissions to external actors who do not secure the network or participate in governance violates this principle. These rewards do not reflect productive work within the protocol.
-
Invalid redistribution logic: Staking emissions are a finite resource representing shared ownership of network-generated value. Giving a substantial portion to outsiders dilutes the wealth of actual participants—validators and stakers—without justification. Even if external entities claim to increase network usage, they are not part of the core value creation process. The redistribution is fundamentally unfair, reducing the relative wealth and rewards of those who bear risk and maintain consensus.
-
Guaranteed dilution of participant wealth: By allocating emissions externally, every validator and staker suffers a relative loss in potential rewards. This is a direct, structural redistribution from contributing participants to outsiders. The logical mechanism of using emissions as a reward is therefore invalid because it undermines the very purpose of emissions: incentivizing and preserving network security and stability.
2.2 Ethical Invalidity
-
Unfair redistribution of communal wealth: Validators and stakers invest time, capital, and risk to secure the network. Diverting a portion of emissions to external entities who do not contribute constitutes an unethical transfer of communal resources.
-
Higher-order moral invalidation: Regardless of whether external entities can generate additional network usage, the ethical problem lies in rewarding non-contributors at the expense of contributors. The proposal creates a moral mismatch: the system disproportionately benefits outsiders while undermining the incentives and rights of those who sustain the network.
3. Conclusion
The emissions proposal is invalid both logically and ethically. Logically, it misallocates rewards, undermining the principle that emissions should incentivize network security and governance. Ethically, it unfairly redistributes wealth away from contributors to outsiders, creating a moral imbalance that cannot be justified by potential external network activity. Any system that allocates earned emissions to non-contributors represents a fundamental flaw in both design and fairness.
4. Proposal
This proposal specifically opposes emissions leaving the network’s security protocol distribution to external participants. Additionally, we advocate for unbranding the official network back to its original EGLD-related identity to clearly reflect the EGLD token that secures the network (e.g., EGLD as “eGold,” or if possible, “Elrond Gold”).
The MultiversX Labs S.R.L., MultiversX Foundation, and MultiversX should remain distinct participants and founders of the EGLD network, maintaining their own branding and projects independently, without sharing the network’s official name.
Furthermore, if the Foundation wishes to create external outflows, capital raises, financial products, ETFs, or any other enterprise, it may do so using only its own resources—either from external funding or from resources it has earned independently as protocol validators—without diverting emissions intended for the network’s security and stakers.
This clarification ensures that all actors’ roles are clearly represented, while preserving fairness and alignment of rewards with network participants.