超級流動性面臨以來最複雜的挑戰之一，與果凍令牌和治理有關。

與果凍有關的永久合同的突然推薦引發了批評，信任喪失和市場波動的連鎖反應。但是，這也成為對協議及其治理體系的深刻續籤的起點。

Hyperliquid has been facing one of the most complex challenges since its inception, linked to the JELLY token and governance. The sudden delisting of perpetual contracts linked to JELLY triggered a chain reaction of criticism, loss of trust, and market volatility. But it also became the starting point for a profound renewal of the protocol and its governance system.

自從其成立以來，Hyplliquid一直面臨著與果凍令牌和治理有關的最複雜挑戰之一。與果凍有關的永久合同的突然推薦引發了批評，信任喪失和市場波動的連鎖反應。但這也成為了對協議及其治理體系深刻續籤的起點。

What happened with JELLY on Hyperliquid?

果凍在超液體上發生了什麼？

Everything began with suspicious movements in the markets related to the JELLY token. In response to these anomalous dynamics, the validators of the Hyperliquid network voted for the immediate delisting of the perpetual contracts associated with the asset. A drastic decision, but deemed necessary to protect users from potential manipulations and maintain the integrity of the protocol. The removal of the contracts was approved through the internal voting mechanism of the validators, with the aim of being completed by Friday, March 17.

一切始於與果凍令牌有關的市場可疑動作。為了響應這些異常動態，超流動網絡的驗證者投票決定立即將與資產相關的永久合同推薦。一個艱鉅的決定，但被認為是保護用戶免受潛在操作並保持協議完整性的必要條件。通過驗證者的內部投票機制批准了合同的刪除，目的是在3月17日星期五完成。

To limit the economic damage suffered by the users involved, the Hyper Foundation has announced an automatic refund program based on on-chain data, excluding however the addresses identified as suspicious or linked to fraudulent behavior. The goal is to return the value of the deposited tokens to those who were victims of the scam.

為了限制相關用戶所遭受的經濟損害，超級基金會宣布了基於鏈數據的自動退款計劃，不包括被確定為可疑或與欺詐行為相關的地址。目的是將存款令牌的價值歸還給那些騙局受害者的人。

The criticisms and the comparison with FTX

批評和與FTX的比較

The intervention, although justified according to the Hyperliquid team, has raised strong criticisms in the crypto community, sparking a heated debate on transparency and the decentralization of the protocol. Among the most critical voices, stands out that of Gracy Chen, CEO of Bitget, one of the main centralized exchanges in the sector. In a tweet that went viral, Chen compared what happened on Hyperliquid to the collapse of FTX, highlighting how, even in environments that define themselves as decentralized, decision-making power is sometimes concentrated in a few hands.

該干預措施雖然根據超流動團隊的說法是合理的，但在加密貨幣社區中提出了強烈的批評，引發了關於透明度和協議權力下放的激烈辯論。在最關鍵的聲音中，該行業主要的集中交易所之一Bitget的首席執行官Gracy Chen脫穎而出。在傳播病毒的推文中，Chen將超流動性上發生的事情與FTX的崩潰進行了比較，即使在將自己定義為分散的，決策能力的環境中，有時也會集中在幾隻手中。

According to Chen, the unilateral delisting action without a clear process of public consensus reflects a governance that is still immature and potentially dangerous, just like in the FTX case, where centralized decisions led to disaster. The criticism touches on a key point: how truly decentralized is a DeFi platform if crucial decisions can be made by a small number of validators without notice?

根據陳的說法，沒有明確的公共共識過程的單方面提取行動反映了一種仍然不成熟且潛在危險的治理，就像在FTX案中一樣，集中式決定導致了災難。批評涉及一個關鍵點：如果少數驗證者可以在未通知的情況下做出關鍵決定，則如何真正分散平台？

The responses of Hyperliquid: on-chain governance and new rules

超流動性的反應：鏈政治和新規則

Public pressure has pushed Hyperliquid to respond with concrete actions. A new risk management framework has indeed been introduced, with the aim of increasing transparency and strengthening decentralization. Among the main innovations of Hyperliquid and its governance

公共壓力促使超流動以具體的行動做出反應。確實引入了一個新的風險管理框架，目的是提高透明度和加強權力下放。超流動性及其治理的主要創新

* On-chain voting system for delistings: every decision will be made directly on the blockchain, avoiding off-chain coordination. If a quorum of stake among validators is reached, the delisting action will be executed automatically through the HyperCore engine.

*對脫穎而出的鏈上投票系統：每個決定都將直接在區塊鏈上做出，避免鍊鍊協調。如果達到驗證器之間的股份法定人數，則將通過HyperCore引擎自動執行降落操作。

* Public announcement of voting intentions: in the upcoming updates, validators will be required to communicate their decisions in advance, allowing the community to prepare and express opinions.

*公開宣布投票意圖：在即將到來的更新中，將需要驗證者提前交流他們的決定，從而使社區能夠準備和表達意見。

On March 29, a test was conducted on the delisting of MYRO to demonstrate the functionality of the new system. Validators 2, 3, 4, and 5 cast their votes, while validator 1 chose to abstain, awaiting the completion of the stake delegation program. The goal is to ensure maximum participation in the governance process.

3月29日，對Myro的推薦進行了測試，以證明新系統的功能。驗證者2、3、4和5進行了投票，而驗證者1選擇棄權，等待蛋糕代表團計劃的完成。目的是確保最大程度地參與治理過程。

The impact on the market: HYPE attempts the recovery

對市場的影響：炒作嘗試恢復

The HYPE token, native to the Hyperliquid platform, reacted negatively to the incident. In the days following the delisting of JELLY, the price lost about 28% of its value. However, the situation seems to be slowly stabilizing. The bear pressure is decreasing, and a technical support zone has formed around 12.20 dollars. Open Interest has also started to rise again, which could be a sign of renewed interest from investors.

炒作令牌原產於超流利平台，對該事件產生了負面反應。在果凍推薦後的日子裡，價格損失了約28％的價值。但是，情況似乎正在緩慢穩定。熊壓力正在降低，技術支撐區的形成約為12.20美元。開放興趣也開始再次上升，這可能是投資者重新興趣的標誌。

If the current support holds, an attempt at trend reversal and a return of confidence in the market cannot be ruled out. The HYPE token will be closely monitored in the coming weeks to understand the potential recovery of the Hyperliquid ecosystem.

如果目前的支持成立，則不能排除趨勢逆轉和對市場信心回歸的嘗試。在接下來的幾週內，將密切監測炒作令牌，以了解超流利生態系統的潛在恢復。

What to expect now from Hyperliquid?

現在，超級流動能期望什麼？

Hyperliquid has already announced a series of future updates to strengthen its infrastructure. These include a public governance dashboard to follow all the decisions of the validators and on-chain audit tools, which will allow the community to verify every transaction and vote. The platform is also planning improvements to the interfaces for stake delegation, facilitating participation for less experienced users.

Hyperliquid已經宣布了一系列未來的更新，以加強其基礎設施。其中包括一個公共治理儀表板，以遵循驗證者和鏈上審計工具的所有決定，這將使社區能夠驗證每筆交易和投票。該平台還計劃改進界面委託委託的界面，從而促進經驗不足的用戶的參與。

The objective is clear: to build a transparent, secure ecosystem truly controlled by its community. This integration is part of a broader strategy to decentralize critical functions of the protocol and enhance the user experience.

目標很明確：建立一個由其社區真正控制的透明，安全的生態系統。這種集成是將協議關鍵功能分散並增強用戶體驗的更廣泛策略的一部分。

Reflection: real decentralization or just narrative?

反思：真正的權力下放還是只是敘述？

The episode of JELLY is yet another demonstration that decentralization is not an automatic condition, but a continuous process that requires attention, constant updates, and the willingness to truly share decision-making power. The comparison with FTX, although strong, highlights an uncomfortable truth: even in DeFi protocols, the risk of centralization exists — and it manifests precisely when decisions are made in opaque environments or without consulting the user base.

果凍的情節是另一個演示，即權力下放不是自動條件，而是需要關注，持續更新以及真正共享決策能力的持續過程。與FTX的比較雖然很強，但卻突出了一個令人不安的事實：即使在Defi協議中，集中化的風險也存在 - 並且在不透明的環境中做出決策或不諮詢用戶群時，它會精確表現出來。

Hyperliquid has reacted proactively, but it will be its ability to maintain these commitments over

超流動性已積極反應，但它將是維持這些承諾的能力