A discussion has emerged regarding the governance role of token holders in blockchain systems, emphasizing the need for social consensus to regularly re-approve governance structures. The debate suggests that token holders could be part of a multi-house system, where their influence is balanced by other governance mechanisms. This approach aims to prevent token holders from having unilateral control over protocol rules or coin issuance. Proponents advocate for governance designs that incorporate "indirection," where goals are set by voters, potentially including token holders, and achieved through market mechanisms. Concepts like futarchy and deep funding are highlighted as potential models. Additionally, there is a call for developing formalized membership systems that are not based on tradeable coins, such as on-chain vouching mechanisms, to ensure accountability and prevent the sale or rental of governance rights.