THORChain co-founder claims his protocol is more decentralized than Bitcoin and Ethereum

THORChain’s co-founder Chad Barraford has sparked a debate over what decentralization truly means in blockchain networks. He argues that THORChain is more decentralized than Bitcoin and Ethereum because a small group of operators could pause THORChain, whereas even fewer parties could halt Bitcoin or Ethereum. This claim came in October 2026 amid criticism following a $387.5 million hack on Bitget in September 2026, where THORChain declined to intervene on funds linked to the hackers.

Barraford’s defense centers on neutrality, asserting that THORChain cannot selectively block transactions, just as Bitcoin and Ethereum cannot. He explains that governance on THORChain is collective, with validators voting and most changes requiring approval from two-thirds of nodes. However, critics argue that THORChain’s use of a threshold signature scheme (TSS) for collective custody creates vulnerabilities not present in Bitcoin or Ethereum.

Critics point out that emergency procedures on THORChain can pause the network with as few as three or four validators, raising questions about the protocol’s true decentralization. THORChain retired address blacklisting in February 2025, further limiting its ability to block specific addresses. Barraford counters that pausing the network affects everyone equally, whereas blocking an address singles out individuals, a practice THORChain has abandoned.

The debate highlights a broader challenge in DeFi: evaluating protocols beyond marketing claims of decentralization. Investors must examine governance structures, validator requirements, and the tools protocols have chosen to remove or retain.