Q4 2025 Fil+ Improvement Discussion Hub;fil+ 制度改进意见报告集中讨论帖-中英文

[haheihou5]

2025 Q4 filcoin fil+ 制度改进意见报告

针对filecoin项目的fil+制度，在这个时间点提出来显然有些晚，社区里的建设者和协议实验室（protocolab,以下简称PL）在github上 经过多轮讨论最终无法达成一致，导致目前此临时方案一直无法进行改进和升级。
我在经过一个月的各方沟通，做出如下报告
用以推进fil+改进

现状
Fil+ 制度在主网一上线就发布fip-0003，旨在为了快速提高全网算力，并奖励早期参与者，做出了一个简单直接的方案，就是在链上给了个别人权力，来采用人类治理的方案进行10倍算力发放的方案，此方案作为一个临时激励计划，并不能保证公平性，有悖于区块链精神
但作为临时激励方案，我们只能暂时允许它存在，但需要尽快做出调整；
事实上这件事没有进行下去，并让它以这种粗暴的方式存在了5年+
截止到2025年11月 中间的修改提案有fip0056（2022年12月 由PL主动提出）改进意见，增大dc倍数，矿工社区进行了一次投票，并否决了这个提案，在当时的情况下，很多人并不能理解对fil+制度持续更新的重要性，只是简单粗暴的投票拒绝，并没有进行后续方案的更新，此外，PL 作为项目负责人，没有针对此类问题提出合理的治理计划。他们也没有在一个更开放的公共空间进行深入讨论(或引导此事推进)，事实上，我认为 PL 未能在此制度的治理上有效行使领导权和后续治理责任。
 
2023年8月 fip0077 提议对新进入矿工征收押金（作者Zac, MikeLi）
我作为一个完全的矿工，对PL的建设意见保持尊重，但我认为这不是一个利于生态发展的好方案，并会引起SP群体的反感
2023年8月 fip0078 提出取消fil+继续分发dc算力 (作者fatman13等)
此提案过于简单粗暴，没有过渡层，很可能适得其反，并且与 juan代表的PL团队意见相悖，只能作为一个方向，但绝不可能一次成型，毕竟filecoin是一条已经正在运行的链，需要考虑的因素很多，此提案我站在PL和juan这边。
Fip0080 和078基本一样
Fip0093 2024年 2月  分叉整条链 并把治理钱包f090 转移至f099 ，由匿名者提出，我认为此fip作为一个行为艺术，只是为了表达立场，告诉PL 社区的力量不容小觑，事实上作者并没有真的想要分叉整个网络，因为显然他的准备是不足的，所以我称其为“行为艺术”
还有其他的未记录的讨论和fips，内容基本类似
自此社群也放弃了再次提此类fips
 
但是社群的讨论并没有中断，如果关注此事的人，应该可以找到类似的讨论
#636
这条讨论是比较有建设性的，在后面讨论
#774
2023年由dcasem 提出，可以看出此条提议已经进行了一些思考
提出了 立即停止fil+ 和逐步停止fil+两种方案
#1082

#1176
项目方代表的git 管理员提出的链上数据认证以及费用支付系统
（能力有限，描述比较复杂我不是很理解）
#1208
其余不再列举
 
还有截止2025年11月第三方提出的autocap方案
说明社群中有基于此事的解决方案并愿意积极提出改进意见
 
和一些个人参与者私下里表达的态度我在后面将其总结
 
 
矛盾点
以juan为核心的协议实验室认为fil+规则 可以保证真实数据的流入，减少整条链的垃圾数据，并增强链上数据的可用比例，所以坚决不同意直接取消此制度。
而通过上述fips的主要内容可以看出，社区提出的直接取消fil+，是有悖于filecoin的远大愿景的

 可以从上面的历史记录看出，PL和社区对于fil+的讨论几乎从未停止，但因为在几年前的时代背景下，最终也没能解决此问题因为双方都没有认真的换位思考过，并在提案中表达出来，但是共同建设的心从未停止
从历史记录来看，双方的沟通存在隔阂，对彼此的立场缺乏深入理解。
 
不过都已经过去了，当所有人都安静的坐下来，换位思考（包括作者我自己）理解对方的意思，我想这件事应该很快会迎来进展。

分析
针对 PL
从PL的各种渠道内容的态度来看，PL坚决维护filecoin的实际功能，鼓励真实数据参与奖励分配，并对垃圾数据表示排斥，这是对filecoin愿景的维护，非常真诚且意义重大.
但事实是
目前的fil+制度依赖人类治理，其效率低下是第一大问题，其二是有很多公证人对垃圾数据授权，以换取收益，这是作弊行为；我想这才是为什么所有发言人都怒气冲冲的原因.
而且，每一条pow链都需要矿工来维护链条健壮性以保证安全，虽然filecoin有一些不同，但这不是否认cc矿工对生态做出贡献的理由。
并且当链条进入的稳定运行期，cc矿工依然可以在代币通缩上贡献相当大的份额。
PL 的某些提议（例如鼓励代币燃烧以促进通缩）可能会对 CC 矿工的生存能力产生负面影响，这表明需要更全面的生态系统影响评估。
当然，有一些人比作者更早认识到cc矿工的重要性，提出了一些建设性意见，用以增强cc矿工的竞争力，但是当时被否，理由不得而知；#636
 
针对社区和矿工

独立矿工对运营成本高度敏感，导致涉及成本增加的提案往往受到强烈抵制。社区讨论时常伴随激烈的言辞，这增加了理性沟通的难度。
并且传统矿工SP有相当多的人并不能理解整个生态的运行原理，只能从自身利益的角度发出声音，传统矿工更需要“矿池”这一角色来充当缓冲层和提供服务，很遗憾目前社区并没有类似的组织，所以PL作为主导者应该保持与社区的紧密联系。
并且由于一些公证人和头部矿工是此规则的受益者，其本身并不愿意做出改变，但是他们内心都知道，新时代要来了。
解决方案的初步设想
 
虽然整个矿工群体中有相当多的不理智者
但其中不乏有真正对生态建设有帮助的提议
 
比如作者原本想要提交的建议如下：
1、减小新矿工的接入门槛：无论是采用类似swan开发的dc和数据分发平台，还是PL重新开发的数据分发系统，都应该继续以增加全网算力的方式来促进通缩；
目前的时间节点就是一个通胀时代，所以短期内的目标理应如此；
简单来说，无论何时我们都不能放弃鼓励新的 SP 加入网络，并让整个接入流程简单化。Filecoin 与传统的 PoW 链有所不同，在 PoW 链上，部分职责由矿池承担，但在 Filecoin 中缺乏类似机制，因此需要特别关注接入流程的简化。
 （此条建议是原本作者作为一个独立SP的最初想法，但是经过各种的社区讨论，我综合了很多人的想法，又给出了下面两条建议）

2 、在鼓励新sp简单化接入过程中，无法避免使用cc扇区，所以作者认为cc扇区在相当长的时间中无法取消，但是显然cc扇区对链上存储起不到实际作用，那么我们用第3条，来弱化它的存在，但又允许他存在，并且其将为整个生态的代币通缩持续做贡献，而且接入门槛更低，如果其锁定了540天的订单，在这个过程中依然可以依靠dc扇区来成为真正的SP持续的为生态做贡献，并且能降低自己的设备成本，这对 SP 而言是一个具有吸引力的选项。
3、既然要鼓励cc扇区接入，又要弱化他的存在，那么方法就是，扇区分级，类似之前提案中看到过的，不同倍率.
比如，给予cc扇区最高5倍的算力，并让其燃烧一部分费用（真正的促进通缩），又或者是增加其cc扇区的质押时间来提高倍数，两种方式结合更好；这样能够以两种方式来促进通缩；我想这些功能，很容易就能实现。
Dc数据依然给与10倍算力，但是，这里迎来了新的问题，我们都知道一个大的SP想要短时间内增加其算力规模，现有的带宽显然无法解决问题，以前的方案是链上给与dc额度，数据从线下导入，这是目前大多数sp的方式，但其中似乎存在一些问题.
如果当这个大型sp算力达到目标算力之后，他们会继续持续的为日常服务做贡献吗？又或者说他的带宽不允许它进行日常的线上的数据订单，那么这个sp对整个网络的贡献就是有限的
这时候就需要给在保持在线接受数据的SP一些额外奖励
（无论是数据是通过谁传输，PL也好，swan也好，其他第三方也好，这部分数据展现filecoin的持续可用性的，但数据量肯定没有线下导入的方式大，因为带宽的成本问题；还有如果由第三方来运营此组件产生的成本，以何种方式收回），
这些在线传输到SP的数据，我认为应该给15X算力  ，并在封装时由SP支付一些费用；这些费用无论是燃烧也好，还是给第三方支付带宽费用也好，都是必要的（需要讨论的）
因为他们对于存储功能的可持续使用做出了最大的贡献。

（此条建议可以结合636的时间乘数，来让cc扇区的倍数能和dc扇区的收益相同）
#636
结合636的大致意思（对不起作者，我的水平实在有限）和其他fips，我做出了以下表格，来示例我对分级扇区 的区分对待 概念的设想

扇区类型/时长 540 days 1080days
cc sectors 5x 10x
dc sectors 10x 待议
online dc sectors  15x 待议

 优势
当我们公平的看待cc扇区和dc扇区的时候，才能真正的让数据市场化，自由化，由需求端来决定cc和dc在网络中的占比，但同时又不妨碍filecoin内在的pow部分，不要忘了filecoin本身就是混合协议，每个部分都有其存在的必要性，不能以僵化的视角追逐目标，而忘了我们其实有两条腿。
以上的所有建议，都可以在公开社群拆分讨论和实施，修改或删除

结语
最终，本文也没有提到完全罢免或取消公证人制度，因为那是暂时不可行的，公证人必须继续配合线上系统进行自动发单，将人治改为链上治理；如果某些公证人群体想要以第三方形式来继续为生态做贡献，我想SP很愿意为带宽和分发系统的服务付费
如果PL决定由其本身来开发这些业务，那么我相信PL会给出一个更加细致的方案，如果决定不做，我想应该给社群一个合理的解释，而不是保持沉默
此文档作为fil+治理提供了一些建议，其中细节还需要社区和PL以及开发者一起进行细致讨论和修改，或讨论其可行性，其中包含了一些作者本人的主观性描述，并不代表其他的任何组织和个人

for english
2025 Q4 Filcoin Fil+ System Improvement Suggestion Report

The FIL+ scheme for the Filecoin project was proposed rather late. After multiple rounds of discussions on GitHub, the community's builders and Protocol Labs (PL) were unable to reach a consensus, which has prevented this temporary solution from being improved or upgraded.
After a month of communication with all parties, I hereby submit the following report.
To advance FIL+ improvements
status quo
The FIL+ system, with FIP-0003 released immediately upon mainnet launch, aimed to rapidly increase network hashrate and reward early participants. It implemented a simple and direct solution: granting certain individuals on-chain authority to distribute 10 times the hashrate using a human-governed approach. However, as a temporary incentive program, this scheme cannot guarantee fairness and contradicts the spirit of blockchain technology.
However, as a temporary incentive plan, we can only allow it to exist temporarily, but adjustments need to be made as soon as possible;
In fact, this matter did not proceed, and it was allowed to exist in this brutal manner for more than 5 years.
As of November 2025, one of the proposed modifications was fip0056 (proposed by PL in December 2022), which suggested increasing the DC multiplier. The mining community held a vote and rejected this proposal. At the time, many people did not understand the importance of continuous updates to the FIL+ system; they simply voted to reject it without any subsequent updates.Furthermore, PL, as the project leader, failed to propose a reasonable governance plan for these issues. They also failed to engage in in-depth discussions in a more open public space.，In fact, I believe that PL has failed to effectively exercise leadership and subsequent governance responsibilities in the governance of this system.
 
In August 2023, fip0077 proposed imposing a deposit on new miners (authors: Zac, Mike Li).
As a full-time miner, I respect PL's suggestions for development, but I believe it is not a good solution for ecological development and will provoke resentment from the SP community.
In August 2023, fip0078 proposed canceling FIL+ and continuing to distribute DC computing power (authors fatman13 et al.).
This proposal is too simplistic and crude, lacking a transitional layer, and is likely to backfire. Furthermore, it contradicts the opinions of the PL team represented by Juan. It can only serve as a direction, but it can never be finalized in one go. After all, Filecoin is an already operational chain, and many factors need to be considered. I stand with PL and Juan on this proposal.
Fip0080 and 078 are basically the same.
In February 2024, Fip0093 forked the entire chain and moved the governance wallet f090 to f099. This was proposed by an anonymous individual.I believe this FIP, as a form of performance art, was merely an expression of a stance, conveying the powerful influence of the PL community. In reality, the author didn't genuinely intend to fork the entire network, as his preparation was clearly inadequate. Therefore, I call it "performance art."
There are other undocumented discussions and fips, with basically similar content.
From then on, the community stopped mentioning such fips.
 
However, the discussion within the community did not stop; those who follow this issue should be able to find similar discussions.
#636
This discussion is quite constructive and will be discussed later.
#774
This proposal was put forward by ‘dcasem’ in 2023, suggesting that the matter had already undergone some consideration; it proposes two options: immediately stopping FIL+ and gradually phasing out FIL+.
#1082
#1176
The project representative with the GitHub handle 'jennijuju' proposed an on-chain data authentication and fee payment system. (Due to limited ability, the complex description is not fully understood by me.)
#1208
Others will not be listed.
 
Also, there are autocap solutions proposed by third parties up to November 2025.
This indicates that there are solutions to this problem within the community, and people are willing to actively offer suggestions for improvement.
 
I will summarize the attitudes expressed privately by some individual participants later.
 
 
Contradiction
Protocol Labs, with Juan at its core, believes that the FIL+ rule can guarantee the inflow of real data, thereby reducing junk data across the entire chain and increasing the usability of on-chain data. Therefore, they are determined to continue using this system and do not agree with the idea of directly canceling it.
As can be seen from the main points of the aforementioned FIPS, the community's proposal to directly cancel FIL+ contradicts Filecoin's grand vision.
As can be seen from the historical records above, discussions between PL and the community regarding FIL+ have almost never ceased. However, due to the context of several years ago, this issue ultimately remained unresolved because neither side seriously considered the other's perspective and expressed it in their proposals. Nevertheless, the desire to build together never wavered.
Historically, both sidesThere is a communication barrier and a lack of in-depth understanding of each other's positions.。
 
But that's all in the past now. Now that everyone has sat down quietly and tried to understand each other's perspectives (including myself), I think things will soon start to move forward.
analyze
PL
Judging from PL's stance across various channels, PL is determined to uphold the actual functionality of Filecoin and encourages real data to participate in reward distribution.And its rejection of junk data demonstrates its commitment to upholding the Filecoin vision; this is sincere and significant.
But the truth is
CurrentFIL+ system relies on human governance,ThatInefficiency is the biggest problem.Secondly, many notaries authorize the distribution of junk data in exchange for profit.CheatingI think that's why all the speakers were so angry.
Furthermore, every PoW chain requires miners to maintain its robustness to ensure security. While Filecoin differs somewhat, this does not negate the fact that...CC miners contribute to the environmentThe reason.
Furthermore, once the chain enters a stable operating period, CC miners can still contribute a significant share to token deflation.
Some of PL's proposals (such as encouraging token burning to promote deflation) could negatively impact the viability of CC miners, suggesting a need for a more comprehensive ecosystem impact assessment.
Of course, some people recognized the importance of CC miners earlier than the author and offered some constructive suggestions to enhance CC miners' competitiveness, but these suggestions were rejected at the time, and the reasons are unknown.#636
 
Targeting communities and miners

Independent miners are highly sensitive to operating costs, leading to strong resistance to proposals involving cost increases. Community discussions are often accompanied by heated exchanges, making rational communication difficult.
Furthermore, many traditional miners (SPs) do not understand the operating principles of the entire ecosystem and can only voice their opinions from the perspective of their own interests. Traditional miners need the role of "mining pools" to act as a buffer and provide services. Unfortunately, there is no such organization in the community at present. Therefore, PLs, as the leaders, should maintain close contact with the community.
Furthermore, since some notaries and top miners are beneficiaries of this rule, they are unwilling to make changes, but they all know in their hearts that a new era is coming.

Initial ideas for the solution
 
Although there are quite a few irrational people in the entire mining community
However, some of these proposals are genuinely helpful for ecological development.
 
For example, the author originally wanted to submit the following suggestion:
1、Lowering the barrier to entry for new minersWhether using a DC and data distribution platform similar to Swan's or a data distribution system redeveloped by PL, deflation should continue to be promoted by increasing the overall network computing power.
We are currently in an era of inflation, so this should be the goal in the short term.
In short, we must never give up encouraging new SPs to join the network and simplifying the entire access process.Filecoin differs from traditional Proof-of-Work (PoW) chains, where some responsibilities are undertaken by mining pools; however, Filecoin lacks a similar mechanism.Therefore, special attention needs to be paid to simplifying the access process.。
(This suggestion was originally the author's initial idea as an independent SP, but after various community discussions, I have combined the ideas of many people and put forward the following two suggestions.)

2. Encouraging new SPssimplifyDuring the access process, the use of CC sectors is unavoidable, so the author believes that CC sectors cannot be eliminated for a considerable period of time. However, it is clear that CC sectors do not play a practical role in on-chain storage. Therefore, we use the third point to...Its existence is downplayed, yet allowed to continue, and it will continue to contribute to the token deflation of the entire ecosystem. Moreover, the entry barrier is lower; if it locks up orders for 540 days, it can still rely on DC sectors to become a true SP and continuously contribute to the ecosystem, while also reducing its own equipment costs.This is an attractive option for SP.。
   3、Since we want to encourage CC sector access while simultaneously mitigating its presence, the solution is to...Sector ClassificationSimilar to what we've seen in previous proposals,Different magnification
   For example, the cc sector can be given up to 5 times the computing power.And let it burn a portion of the cost.(To truly promote deflation), or to increase the staking time of its cc sector to increase the multiplier, a combination of the two methods would be better; this would promote deflation in two ways; I think these functions can be easily implemented.
   DC data is still allocated 10 times the computing power, but this brings a new problem. We know that a large SP (Service Provider) wants to increase its computing power in a short time, but the existing bandwidth is clearly insufficient. The previous solution was to allocate DC quotas on-chain and import data from offline sources; this is the current method used by most SPs. However...There seem to be some problems.
   If these large-scale SPs reach their target computing power, will they continue to contribute to daily services? Or perhaps its bandwidth doesn't allow it to handle daily online data orders, in which case this SP's contribution to the overall network is limited.
   At this time, it is necessaryGive SPs some extra rewards for staying online and accepting data.
   (Regardless of who transmits the data—PL, Swan, or other third parties—this data demonstrates Filecoin's continued availability, but the data volume is certainly not as large as that imported offline due to bandwidth costs; also, if a third party operates this component, how will the costs be recovered?)
   I believe that the data transmitted online to the SP should be allocated 15X computing power, with the SP paying a fee during the encapsulation process; whether this fee is paid through resource burning or by paying bandwidth fees to a third party, it is necessary (and requires discussion).
   Because they have made the greatest contribution to the sustainable use of storage capabilities.

(This suggestion can be combined with the 636 time multiplier to make the multiplier of the CC sector the same as that of the DC sector.)
#636
Combining the general meaning of 636 (apologies to the author, my level is really limited) and other FIPS, I created the following table to illustrate my concept of differentiated treatment of hierarchical sectors.

sector type/time 540 days 1080days
cc sectors 5x 10x
dc sectors 10x To be discussed
online dc sectors  15x To be discussed

 
All of the above suggestions can be discussed, implemented, modified, or deleted in a public community.

Conclusion
Ultimately, this article does not mention completely abolishing or canceling the notary system, as that is not feasible at present. Notaries must continue to cooperate with the online system for automated document issuance, shifting from human-based governance to on-chain governance. If certain groups of notaries wish to continue contributing to the ecosystem as third parties, I think...SPs are willing to pay for bandwidth and distribution system services.
If the PL decides to develop these services themselves, I believe they will provide a more detailed plan. If they decide against it, I think they should give the community a reasonable explanation instead of remaining silent.
This document offers some suggestions for FIL+ governance. However, the details require further discussion and revision by the community, policymakers, and developers, as well as a feasibility study. It contains some subjective descriptions by the author and does not represent the views of any other organization or individual.

[beck-8]

在线传输到SP的数据，我认为应该给15X算力

那我如果在本地启动本地的server 50Gbps ，离线不就变成了在线了吗？

[haheihou5]

那就要看这部分功能谁来做了,是pl还是第三方,实际如何验证了,背后是哪些公证人的地址在后面授权,还都需要更细致的讨论,感谢你的质疑,再多点!

[beck-8]

谁做都不容易区分离线和在线，只会衍生出更多的离线造假变成在线的方案

[haheihou5]

嗯是的，如果要预防避免不了要做一些代码的改动，甚至给公证人分级，这里的几个建议可以拆开讨论，它们不是一个整体，也几乎不可能一次实施

[likuo5211-cmyk]

项目方就是一群固执的人，你发什么都没有一点作用。这个项目最终走向死亡。

[haheihou5]

死马当活马医咯0.0，不破不立，只要你还想，办法总是有的

[Fatman13]

从提案的提法，以及项目方的惯例来看，我觉得他们有可能会说“fil+的问题推荐你在fil+治理仓库里面提”。

[haheihou5]

他们总喜欢忽略重要的信息而说一些无关紧要的废话，比如每天在filecoin TG群里说GM 和GN,除了这两个能说其他的都不能说

[haheihou5]

让我来尝试总结一些这个提议的第一条，提升cc扇区的权益，原因是cc矿工对整个生态的贡献无法忽视，并且作为SP我宁愿把曾经花费的“矿工税”直接在封装时燃烧掉，也不愿意再付给公证人购买“虚假的数据”，因为那不但浪费了SPs的时间，还助长了欺诈，我们可以直接在封装cc扇区时把这些“矿工税”烧掉，以促进通缩