HypurrCo’s Hybrid Governance Decision-Making Methodology

As a trusted community validator, and the largest validator currently outside of foundation nodes; our role is to represent both the capital commitments of stakers and the voices of our community.

To achieve fairness and legitimacy, we follow a hybrid governance model that blends stake-based voting with community participation and validator stewardship.

1. Core Principle

Capital provides weight, community provides legitimacy.

1. Fair Representation - Both large and small stakers deserve meaningful participation.
2. Stake-Proportionality - Governance should reflect actual economic security contributed to the network.
3. Transparency - The process and numbers behind decisions must be clear to all stakeholders.

2. Stakeholder Groups

We recognize three main groups:

1. Stakers - linear stake-weighted governance, including both whales and general stakers.
2. Community Members - active participants on Telegram and X.
3. Validator Stewardship - our responsibility to ensure balance and break ties when needed.

3. Stakeholder Breakdown

Our validator currently represents:

• General Stakers (100–10k HYPE): 6183 participants staking ~4.4M HYPE
• Whales (≥10k HYPE): 320 participants staking ~14M HYPE

This means whales currently hold ~75% of staked HYPE, while general stakers hold ~25%, excluding foundation and Kinetiq’s delegation. 

‍

4. Weight Allocation

To balance influence across groups, we allocate decision weight on a 100-point scale:

Total governance weight = 100 points

• Stakers: 70 points (linear by stake size)
  
  • Whales (≥10k HYPE, ~75% of stake): 52.5 points
  • General stakers (100–10k HYPE, ~25% of stake): 17.5 points
    
    
• Community: 15 points
  
  • HypurrCo and Frens Telegram polls and discussion (Majority Result): 7 points
  • HypurrCore (Closed Door OG Community) Telegram polls and discussion (Majority Result): 3 points
  • X polls and discussion (Majority Result): 5 points
    
    
• Validator Stewardship: 15 points
  
  • Reserved for personal views, tie-breaking, underrepresented voices, and ensuring balance.
  • Noel, Velocity, Kirby - Cofounders of HypurrCollective; and Michael (Representing Nansen) will get 3.75 points each. 
  • We may vote individually and differently, without agreeing with each other's vote.

5. Voting Mechanisms

• Stakeholder Voting within Gated Chats: Gated Whale Chat and Gated General Chat.
  
  • To participate in the Gated Chat Polling: Link your wallets in read-only mode through https://t.me/HypurrFunAlertBot to receive an invite to the chats, where we will be discussing USDH proposals.
• Community Polling: Telegram and X votes.
• Validator Discretion: Used sparingly, documented transparently.

6. Decision Process

1. Signal Phase - Gather sentiment via X & Telegram polls.
2. Stakeholder Phase - Collect staker votes in Whale and General Chat.
3. Synthesis Phase - Apply weighting framework to combine results.
4. Decision Publication - Share outcome with a breakdown of weights, votes, and rationale.

7. Example Calculation

Proposal X receives:

• Whale Stakeholder vote → 65% A / 35% B
  
• General Stakeholder Vote -> 50% A / 50% B
• Community polls → 40% A / 60% B
• Validator stewardship → 50% A

Final Weighted Result:

• Whale Stakers: 52.5 × 65% = 34.125
• General Stakers: 17.5 x 50% = 8.75
• Community: 15 × 40% = 6
• Validator: 15 × 50% = 7.5
• Total A = 56.375

‍

8. Guiding Principles

• Transparency - Publish vote breakdowns and methodology consistently.
• Fairness - Protect against over-representation of any one group.
• Inclusivity - Ensure all stakeholders have a voice proportional to their role.
• Accountability - Validator stewardship as part of the process holds a smaller % stake for fairer process.

‍

Final Comments:

As part of this being the first active governance proposal, our process would improve over time, based off Hyperliquid ecosystem's need.

We're here to support the growth fully, and to be Hyperliquid-aligned.

‍