![](\"https:\/\/s3.cointelegraph.com\/uploads\/2022-06\/82126489-52d0-4345-8e36-1278f88296a2.png\")
<\/p>\nEthereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has shown support for Optimism\u2019s new governance structure, noting that proposals such as using the OP token for gas fees shows \u201cexplicit representation of non-token-holder interests.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Ethereum layer-2 scaling solution deployed the first round of its long-awaited OP token airdrop on June 1 as part of its new governance project the \u201cOptimism Collective.\u201d <\/p>\n
Optimism\u2019s new governance structure involves two parties dubbed the \u201cToken House\u201d and \u201cCitizens\u2019 House.\u201d The former is composed of OP governance token holders and the latter consists of \u201csoul-bound\u201d non-transferrable citizenship NFT owners.<\/p>\n
While it is unclear if Buterin is fully on board with a proposal from June 2 to utilize the OP governance token for gas fees, or just happy that such a discussion was taking place, he noted on Twitter today:<\/p>\n
The two parties mostly oversee different objectives with the Token House tasked with project incentives, protocol upgrades and treasury funds, while the Citizens\u2019 House is focused on retroactive public goods funding. <\/p>\n
The duo also share governance decisions on network parameters and granting new citizenships to the Citizens\u2019 House, something which Buterin seems to appreciate in this instance. <\/p>\n
According to Optimism, the number of citizens in the Citizens\u2019 House will grow over time, and the \u201cmechanism for distributing Citizenships will be determined by the Foundation with input from the Token House.\u201d <\/p>\n
On several occasions, Buterin has outlined his thoughts that the crypto sector needs to \u201cmove beyond coin voting\u201d in decentralized finance (DeFi) or decentralized governance (DeGov) as it runs the risks of having whale governance token holders dominating the voting process. Buterin argues this can often lead to a short-term focus of the whales approving proposals that intend to pump the price of certain assets. <\/p>\n
Such a method can result in small holders and platform users not having a voice in the DeGov process, or what Buterin describes as a lack of non-token-hodler interests. <\/p>\n
As for the OP gas fee proposal, which itself was floated in the Optimism governance forum for ideas and feedback yesterday, sentiment among the community appears mixed. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
While many offered short and sharp comments of agreement, generally noting that it would give OP more utility, numerous others took the time to clearly outline why they were against the idea.<\/p>\n