DF

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

Top-Construction9043

There is also the altcoin meta $BCHB running on Base chain. Serious team backing it and running the ‘Green’ narrative due to proof of stake concensus. Poised to become the preeminent store of value on Base (Layer 2 on ETH). CA: 0x1791B55e734DF69B4906a4178A83dbE63c4F8421

Gvazeky

So what separates Moon from other DeFi tokens like Marlin? And how are transfers safeguarded? 0xe18760D995BBDEd4d8268B6e4E3e2C6c73DF7429

Shiratori-3

https://x.com/BinanceHelpDesk/status/1807624914863903100?t=kmcJE4gOJ6WB1DF4gy2ecQ&s=19

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

ConeDesk


BTCBette

Join the TG and see for yourself that we're legit. Or just look at the chart ffs. Strongest crypto "community" I've ever known, and insanely bullish metrics. https://dexscreener.com/ethereum/0xD9f2A7471d1998C69De5Cae6dF5d3f070F01DF9F

SarasotaTile

A lot of those rich DF will be voting for crypto

rayQuGR

the ongoing [Oasis](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog)-Ocean joint DF incentive program throughout 2024 offers an excellent opportunity for users to benefit from high rewards. If you're interested in checking out Predictoor, now is a perfect time to get involved!

DC600A

Thank you for the post, it was very informative. As the field of crypto AI gets more fans and followers, it is important to appreciate the technologies that work behind the scenes and hence acknowledgment of Oasis Sapphire's role is well-deserved. Over the last year, Ocean Predictoor has grown from strength to strength and both its predictions and data farming (DF) services have indeed benefited from the smart privacy solutions of Oasis. Anyone interested in checking out Predictoor can also reap the benefits of high rewards from the Oasis-Ocean joint [DF incentive program running throughout 2024](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/extending-ocean-predictoor-incentives-2024).

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CNNJDream

Thank you for your response. I apologize if my initial explanation was not clear enough. Allow me to provide more details about the underlying principles of Bitcoin addresses and the specific issue I am facing. In the Bitcoin system, an address is derived from a public key, which in turn is generated from a private key. The process typically follows these steps: A private key is generated, which is a random 256-bit number. The corresponding public key is derived from the private key using elliptic curve cryptography (specifically, the secp256k1 curve). The public key is then hashed using the SHA-256 and RIPEMD-160 algorithms to create a 160-bit hash. This hash is then encoded using Base58Check encoding, which includes a version byte and a checksum, resulting in the final Bitcoin address. In my case, an issue arose during step 2. When generating the public key, the first character of the first 32 hexadecimal characters of the public key was 0. This led to the first 8 bits of the public key being 0, effectively making it a 248-bit public key instead of the expected 256 bits. Despite this, the incorrect 248-bit public key was used to generate a Bitcoin address following steps 3 and 4. This address ended up receiving some bitcoins. Later, I used the same private key to generate the correct 256-bit public key and derived a different Bitcoin address from it. However, the bitcoins that were sent to the first address (derived from the incorrect 248-bit public key) are not accessible using the private key directly, as the Bitcoin system associates those funds with the incorrect public key and address. To further illustrate this, consider the two examples I provided: Example 1: PrivateKeyHexStr: 1D179D45DF2F02271CD4DAA1114B7226480BBF3DA62D94081CC6228C950F3300 Incorrect Public Key (248 bits): 2C3D118366F853F7A7FCD0E0506A87FD1ED7AD7E19103059A85C0FA8ADED85 Incorrect Address: 13mpPh9UMtSN54GTbjj4ht7S3hzCPhmmVA Example 2: PrivateKeyHexStr: 08C5F27C4B0522975583AE6BAE67B2155F5339BA040693335D4A2C4A0A213726 Incorrect Public Key (248 bits): BEC0F8B027D6333EFBBCC87ABD1C2912AB052DE99F391DB3E3EE1EF50708DD Incorrect Address: 14z6wZb4uGE1iT9osbQGMW75iNS1awCGSe In both cases, the incorrect public keys and addresses were generated due to the leading 0 in the public key, causing them to be 248 bits instead of 256 bits. I hope this clarifies the issue I am facing. I am looking for ways to recover the bitcoins that were sent to the addresses derived from these incorrect public keys, given that I have the corresponding private keys. If you have any further questions or need more information, please let me know. I greatly appreciate your interest and any help you can provide.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

Financial_Design_801

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2jAZ0x9H0bQFY6wIbQfnrnIlqMcSHd6X&si=Gd7A_DF6IRFU1As-

Thing_001

1. 888,888 2. 0x3be79Cd40D03DF69c971977Ff685d6212d2c3FC3

BlueSerenit

65,387 0x4E26FF53a5d13295DE2C59FBd61F123bB18081DF

anthr_alxndr

1. 541,069 2. 0x00e577437b0bCF50818350DF9bdd216805590156

oldcoldcod

837012 0x60475b2506A20DF9ee129F251e62f03230Cff887

TackyBrad

1. 116 2.0x6b2A06E26A6DF2b67436b691861187eF9BB882cA

SubjectJellyF1sh

1. 657,000 2. 0x34ac859B699DF3a0e8817B48F999e18814010C71

SirDaddio

517,469 0xC6105B125Dc8274652E29C1aC61FC7DF797997ff

EirianWare

1. 345,678 2. 0x59c3A1F26f30Ae8B0EA8bD86DF9b58dC75A01cf8

waferselamat

1. 380000 2. 0x64EBA937523Cb1CF47b540d83F5DF38E9933C756

MrBlowjangles

1. 444,444 2. 0x228138Da7ED7a3033b51C5DF2c673c0B9d2C3A94

Soggy_Ad6925

0x564eacFfD8cdFbdD79d6B49F586DF1aC275978f5

DC600A

>Ocean Protocol: Ocean Protocol introduces a decentralized data exchange protocol designed to securely share and monetize data. Ocean Predictoor is a highly innovative dApp as it takes the concept of prediction to a new level by offering incentives on data farming (DF). Using Oasis Sapphire, it has strengthened its data privacy and confidential computation abilities and is now offering [DF incentives](https://oasisprotocol.org/blog/extending-ocean-predictoor-incentives-2024) throughout 2024. This opens up a new era of web3 data economy because Oasis offers [smart privacy](https://oasisprotocol.org/) solutions to empower data sovereignty and privacy, and it doesn't even have to be built natively on Oasis, any EVM dApp can leverage the solutions via the cross-chain OPL framework.

Fedshmoker

I dunno why my previous links are being censored but check ocean protocol data challenges, DF rounds, and predictoor ai project

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

mrkandid

Some of us “idiots” look forward to any other snippets of brilliance you can share. Let’s ignore various realities for the average “idiot “ trying to participate in crypto while some leaders in crypto themselves still get scammed for millions, $112M even. https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/31/hackers-steal-112-million-of-xrp-ripple-cryptocurrency/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9zZWFyY2guYnJhdmUuY29tLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAChlkp92yICLwcgAeAc_9GlWKqsnXMl3aOEuJ8fbbBaM67hlqsJKx5G5oAbCf1nheeGy16qu71CgMGwTFppgb3GBiQDKpxzK0zrCKry3emnIUEogJG3Do_XZK2vMP3wksPnLCfp9jYukBmhlYOPHyNoBrYam2es9DF7pQiYdb88J https://x.com/zachxbt/status/1752694489905528943?s=20 -This kinda of response reminds me of the “id**ts” on their command line green screens in the old days of the Internet, you know, back when tcp was a baby, who used to flame the Internet nubies and folks using Windows because they derived self esteem from their apparent brilliance on the command line…..funny thing was, these nubies were actually trying to deliver real value to the world instead of trying to show off in an effort to appear relevant in their obscure existence. -Anyway, it will not be news to anyone that many folks trying to participate in crypto won’t know a lot about the deeper technical details in this arena, but at least they are trying to help. - while the advice to scrupulously check every one of the 32 to 44 characters in a Solana address is while in the heat of a limit order on a dex, or a swap, etc is sound, it’s not always possible and if the experts at Ripple and other crypto orgs can still get hacked, it just shows how difficult this all is. All that said, I appreciate that you and all the others actually took time out to respond. Much appreciated.

Manikhas

Nano_032621DF73642B1CCE2D109D19B27F9222B9589158CF78F5D1D5CD83210BDD63

Adamantinian

Nano sent [successfully](https://nanolooker.com/block/10DE609E30FC04BF116A53804BFD34DF1BACD54F523793720CC92FFAE5775566)! **Learn more about Nano** - Read [this article](https://senatus.substack.com/p/the-basics-of-nano-why-its-such-an) for the basics. - Visit [Nano.community](https://nano.community/introduction/basics) for comprehensive information. **Try a faucet** - [NanoDrop](https://nanodrop.io/) sends some Nano instantly. - [WeNano](https://wenano.net/) has location-based faucets all over the world. **Use Nano** - Queue videos for others to watch or get paid to watch on [CryptoVision](https://cryptovision.live/). - Pay per prompt to access ChatGPT4, DALL·E 3 and more via [Nano-GPT](https://nano-gpt.com/). - Easily develop with Nano using a [Public Node](https://rpc.nano.to) (we're using one right now). **Ask questions** - If you have any further questions, come on over to r/nanocurrency! **Random Nano fact**: It's recently become possible to add the Nano Ӿ symbol (its currency symbol) into [AI generated images](https://nano.org/en/blog/how-to-add-nano-currency-symbol-ai-image-generations--267803bb)!

Adamantinian

Nano sent [successfully](https://nanolooker.com/block/BBCB3491FBAB5D610A95840031B4CB840A70EE7DF654562CF802775925F666B9)! **Learn more about Nano** - Read [this article](https://senatus.substack.com/p/the-basics-of-nano-why-its-such-an) for the basics. - Visit [Nano.community](https://nano.community/introduction/basics) for comprehensive information. **Try a faucet** - [NanoDrop](https://nanodrop.io/) sends some Nano instantly. - [WeNano](https://wenano.net/) has location-based faucets all over the world. **Use Nano** - Queue videos for others to watch or get paid to watch on [CryptoVision](https://cryptovision.live/). - Pay per prompt to access ChatGPT4, DALL·E 3 and more via [Nano-GPT](https://nano-gpt.com/). - Easily develop with Nano using a [Public Node](https://rpc.nano.to) (we're using one right now). **Ask questions** - If you have any further questions, come on over to r/nanocurrency! **Random Nano fact**: It's possible to earn Nano by mining Monero. [Nanswap uses your computer's CPU to mine](https://nanswap.com/mining/nano), auto-converts to Nano, then pays out after just a few seconds.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

SmoothGoing

This is a public key: 04B2A97B14C5825F46BB0B2DF891B3A2FD478A2CBDF94642782D1687BBDB21940A4AF8E7180DBA4E9099F3C047D929C9B32103F64F431D59200098695AAF44A1D9 Address is not a public key.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

Haunting-Guidance759

Not too sure, probably some sort of centralised mechanism? But it’s different from Dark Fusion. DF is proposing a peer to peer decentralised node system where smart contracts are hosted and commands are validated, and validators are rewarded for verifying contract states.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by a deleted user. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://forum.pol... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

milltay

Just sent out 1700VC (~40$) to each address that commented. 0xdc12ABe8a2B811715A00D3fA1EbF3318775d9B58 0x81AFdB76Bd774F0e766fE2079d73dd45cf6a6EFE 0xbB84d01C6d5993e8ddafB3fe53A8E221cFaFA98d 0xdc12ABe8a2B811715A00D3fA1EbF3318775d9B58 0x78898b9d9BBe7729e5197e6948505273b03379DF 0xFf99529A1A79bD8c3daadBa20ef1d5D92d2A282B 0x937f54999aa05caf4a28808acfb3f74b552aa1dd 0xEf874F607E815e4A26dEb573B3FDBB2C5a1A51d1 0xb83FFc73ABb50B9bf340dF0218dd743390cF673F 0x534CA8E9a77e90557c3a81aF89A9B64D7D86D03A Thank you to all who participated and I hope this helps, if just a little bit, with all of the stuff that has happened recently with moons.

HoneyudewIT

Q1. like the feeless, no-fee framework and the promised speeds of VinuChain - what projects and partners are lining up to build and grow with the ecosystem? Q2. what's the size of the typical VinuChain developer grant? Q3. how does VinuChain address security and spamming risks in a different way to avoid the never-ending problems with other blockchains like sol and eth? TY! 0x78898b9d9BBe7729e5197e6948505273b03379DF

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polygon validator community chose to [lock priority fees at a 30 Gwei minimum](https://cryptoslate.com/polygon-matic-to-raise-gas-fee-to-30-gwei-to-prevent-spam-transactions/). That's not an offical part of protocol. Polygon validators have colluded off-chain and are running **gas cartel**, like OPEC. > > However, it still gets tons of spam transactions, which I have experienced first-hand many times. All my Polygon accounts with activity on them were randomly sent spam tokens and NFTs. Many of these tokens are part of scam that try to trick you into interacting with them by selling them. Other are advertising sketchy website links. > > This is the downside of having sub-penny transactions. > > ####**Still requires the Ethereum network** > > The Polygon PoS network is a side chain for Ethereum. Many parts of Polygon still require Ethereum and pay fees in ETH instead of MATIC. OpenSea's NFT are usually quoted in ETH instead of MATIC. The MATIC token its originates on Ethereum and is bridged over to Polygon PoS as an ERC-20 token. Staking is also done on the Ethereum mainnet. The periodic Polygon checkpoints require paying Ethereum fees too. > > Thus Polygon's success depends on Ethereum's success and security. > > Going from Layer 1 Ethereum to Polygon is mainly done through the Polygon PoS bridge, which costs Ethereum gas fees. The first time bridging over to Polygon can be stressful. Their documentation says it should only take [22-30 minutes](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/develop/ethereum-polygon/getting-started/) when it often takes many hours as many people including me have found out the hard way. > > ####**Numerous reorgs** > > Polygon has [multiple reorgs every day](https://polygonscan.com/blocks_forked). Many of these are of 10+ depths, which is dangerously high. Due to reorgs, transactions up to 32 blocks ago can be completely reversed. In fact, up until the Delhi update (Jan 17, 2023), it was common to see reorgs up to 128-blocks ago (5 minutes). After the update, this has been reduced to a max of 32 blocks (1 minute). That's better than before the update, but it's still a lot. The reason behind this unique and dangerous Polygon phenomenon is due to the validator sprints that it uses on the Bor block production layer. [I wrote a separate article to explain this phenomenon](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/polygons-block-reorg-problem). > > Even after the Delhi update, there was still a massive [153-block reorg in Feb 2023](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/) and multiple-validator outage caused by an unrelated bug. > > ####**Centralization concerns** > > **Pausable tokens** > > The [MATIC token contract](https://etherscan.io/token/0x7d1afa7b718fb893db30a3abc0cfc608aacfebb0#code) is pausable. There is a private list of addresses (stored in the "_pausers" private role) that can unilaterally pause the entire MATIC token without needing any other members to approve. > > **Centralized control of Polygon contracts on Ethereum mainnet via its Multisig owner account** > > At any given time, Polygon can update its contracts using this Multisig Gnosis Safe, and it has already done so **40 times in the past year** and 170 times in the past 2 years. That's a lot of unannounced updates. > > It does this through a [5 out of 9 Multisig Gnosis Safe](https://etherscan.io/address/0xfa7d2a996ac6350f4b56c043112da0366a59b74c) (often misquoted as an 5 out of 8 Multisig) that controls all of Polygon's contracts on Ethereum (e.g. Plasma Bridge, PoS Bridge, Staking Contract, Governance Proxy, Ether Bridge, Root Chain Proxy, Polygon-to-Ethereum token mapping, and many other contracts). 4 of these owners are Polygon members, 4 are external DeFi users, and 1 is an unknown account (possibly the owner of Quickswap). > > **[My own investigation](https://mplankton.substack.com/p/investigating-the-59-polygon-multisig) discovered that this MultiSig account is one of the worst-documented parts of Polygon**: > > * Every media site, blog, and forum to this day still thinks it's an 5/8 Multisig based on an old letter back in May 2021. The fact that no one has mentioned the 9th owner (added 2 years ago) is a strong sign the public isn't actually auditing the Polygon admin actions on that Multisig contract. > * A 9th owner was added back [in June 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0xb02b91300e3cea5bb788513cd858f27f27410b3bc67b8e12dca10944b4d611c8) **unannounced**. An additional 2 Polygon owners were swapped in the past year **unannounced**. > * [Back in Aug 2021](https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9eca1e21c66d7a30bfb69dedb0857314cf7ed127d149328d518678f7e22fbdb9), ownership of all Polygon's contracts were replaced by a [TimeLock contract](https://etherscan.io/address/0xCaf0aa768A3AE1297DF20072419Db8Bb8b5C8cEf). This Timelock provides an acceptance window where any action on Polygon's contracts has to wait 48 hours before it takes effect. The Timelock is in turn controlled by the 5/9 Gnosis Safe account. > * Polygon's websites, forums, Discord channel, and subreddit don't mention the Timelock. > * **Even Polygon's own documentation team is unaware of the Timelock.** There is [one document that mentions the Multisig address](https://wiki.polygon.technology/docs/faq/commit-chain-multisigs/) suggests that a Timelock is a future update, when it's actually already active. > > ####**Upgrade process is centralized** > > Polygon Labs controls the upgrade process through centralized governance. > > Back in Dec 2021, the Polygon team [secretly hard-forked the network](https://cryptobriefing.com/a-hacker-stole-1-6m-after-exploiting-a-polygon-bug/) by pushing out a patch 1 day after a hacker stole $1.6M from the network from the Polygon PoS genesis contract in Dec 2021. The team didn't publicize the reason for the emergency patch until over 3 weeks later. > > In Jan 2023, the **Delhi Hardfork, PIP-7**, was voted on by only [15 out of 100 non-dev validators](https://forum.polygon.technology/t/pre-pip-discussion-addressing-reorgs-and-gas-spikes/10623). The vote was only used as non-binding feedback, so Polygon Lab devs still maintained real control over the upgrade. > > In Feb 2023, there was a client bug that caused [a multi-validator outage and 153-block reorg](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/02/22/polygon-blockchain-suffers-apparent-outage/). Due to the outage and slow syncing where many out-of-sync validators were taking up to a day to resync, many of them were missing their 98% checkpoint SLA requirements for staying on as a validator. As a result, the Polygon team pushed **an emergency proposal, PIP-9**, to reduce the threshold back to 95%. In less than half a day, it passed and was activated. Even over 4 days, only 27 out of 100 validators had voted on it. > > **Future decentralized governance** > > It's been over a year since Polygon posted they were looking into [Governance Decentralization](https://blog.polygon.technology/state-of-governance-decentralization/). It wasn't until only Feb 2023 that they started the first steps towards decentralized governance via [PIP-1](https://foru... ***** Would you like to learn more? Check out the [Cointest archive](/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_Polygon) to find submissions for other topics.

CointestMod

#Polygon Con-Arguments Below is a Polygon con-argument written by Maleficent_Plankton. > ####**Has plenty of competitors, including itself** > > Currently, Polygon PoS is competing against optimistic L2 blockchains like Arbitrum One and Optimism. Arbitrum has nearly [2x the TVL as Polygon](https://defillama.com/chains), and Optimism has almost caught up. > > Polygon's future zkEVM rollup is also competing against other zkEVM rollups. Once its zkEVM is released, it's possible it's going to split the Polygon community between those who want to stay on the sidechain and those who want to use the zkEVM. **If you look at their [zkEVM testnet](https://explorer.public.zkevm-test.net/txs?block_number=143530&index=0&page_number=1&page_size=50&pages_limit=200), fees are paid in Ether, not MATIC.** That's bearish for MATIC token utility. > > **TVL has dropped considerably compared to L2s** > > One year ago back in Jan 2022, [Polygon TVL was $4.8B USD](https://defillama.com/chain/Polygon) while the combined [Layer 2 rollup TVL was $5.4B USD](https://l2beat.com/scaling/tvl). While L2 TVL has increased a little despite the bear market, Polygon's TVL has collapsed by 75% to $1.2B. > > **Growing dApp competition from L2 rollups** > > A year ago, Polygon PoS was unique in that it was the only network besides Ethereum that had OpenSea support. Now OpenSea supports a dozen different networks, including competing Layer 2 rollups networks like Optimism, Arbitrum One, and even Arbitrum Nova. So there's a lot more competition. > > **Declining social media support** > > With L2 rollups developing so quickly, many in the Ethereum community have turned against Polygon, creating a narrative that it's "just a sidechain", not a true Layer 2. > > The 0xPolygon subreddit has become more of a ghost town with noticeable amounts of spam posts. I don't think its mods are checking regularly anymore. > > ####**Less resistant to DDoS attacks and spam** > > Like all networks with low transaction fees, it's at risk of DDoS attacks. > > In early Jan 2022, [Sunflowers Farm \(SFF\) unintentionally DDoS-attacked the Polygon PoS network](https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2022/01/06/polygon-under-accidental-attack-from-swarm-of-sunflower-farmers/) and completely congested the network because it was more profitable to play the game and spam transactions than pay network fees. Transaction fees shot up 20x. Eventually, a hacker exploited the SFF game and reduced its price to zero, and users rejoiced because it cleared the congestion. > > **It has a Gas Cartel** > > Spam attacks were eventually mitigated when the whole Polyg