Can Vanar Chain handle compliance without becoming a gated network?
For any “real-world” L1, I ask: who secures it today, and who can challenge that set tomorrow?Vanar Chain aims to mix trusted validators now with token-holder influence over time but that balance can slip.Vanar describes reputation-screened validators (PoR) alongside delegated staking (dPoS): VANRY holders delegate stake, vote for validators, and share in validator rewards.
The whitepaper treats staking as rewards plus voting power in validator selection.It also spells out dPoS “alongside” Proof of Reputation.The website positions Kayon/Neutron as a way to validate compliance before value moves.Reputation filters can be subjective, and delegated voting can be captured if stake concentrates.A studio’s compliance team wants on-chain receipts for micro-purchases. They stake VANRY to back validators they trust. If the validator set stays small, auditability becomes “trust a shortlist,” not “trust the network.”Enterprises adopt first if the validator process is transparent; it fails if reputation is a black box.
PoR-first (safer) or open dPoS-first (fairer)?
