In a recent statement, XRP Ledger dUNL validator VET emphasized that the XRP Ledger’s censorship‑resistant consensus model was the foundation upon which the first decentralized cryptocurrency exchange was built.
His post revisited an older but crucial piece of writing from 2018 by David Schwartz, Chief Technology Officer at Ripple, who explored the concept of censorship resistance and how it differs across blockchain systems. The tweet highlighted how the XRP Ledger’s design principles continue to be central to its performance and use cases years after their introduction.
The XRP Ledger censorship resistant consensus model led to the creation of the first decentralized exchange in crypto.
It's the nuanced difference that makes the XRPL so differentiated but so hard to story tell because of the knowledge barriers you need to overcome. pic.twitter.com/dnjn98iem8
— Vet
(@Vet_X0) October 5, 2025
The XRP Ledger’s consensus mechanism was designed to make censorship both improbable and detectable. Unlike proof‑of‑work systems, where miners can delay or exclude transactions, the validators within the XRP Ledger operate under a transparent model that makes any attempt at censorship observable and provable.
Each validator issues signed statements that reveal their voting behavior, meaning attempts to exclude valid transactions are traceable. This framework enables users to hold validators accountable and ensures that no single entity can manipulate the network’s outcomes without detection.
Soft Censorship and Detectability
In David Schwartz’s 2018 article, he described how “soft censorship,” which is the intentional exclusion or delay of legitimate transactions, is treated differently in various blockchain models.
He noted that while soft censorship is inherent in proof‑of‑work systems such as Bitcoin due to their competitive mining structure, the XRP Ledger only tolerates it if network participants collectively choose to accept such behavior. This distinction, according to Schwartz, gives the XRP Ledger a degree of accountability that proof‑of‑work systems cannot easily replicate.
Because validators’ actions are cryptographically verifiable, users can see if certain transactions are consistently excluded, identifying which validators are responsible. This transparency not only deters malicious behavior but also strengthens the trust framework necessary for the XRP Ledger’s decentralized exchange to operate effectively.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Suitability for Censorship‑Sensitive Use Cases
VET’s statement highlights how this aspect of the XRP Ledger enables it to target use cases that demand high resistance to soft censorship. Proof‑of‑work networks, such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, face structural challenges in guaranteeing immediate and provable censorship resistance.
In contrast, the XRP Ledger’s consensus design provides real‑time detection of validator misbehavior, making it more suitable for applications where the reliable inclusion of transactions is essential, such as decentralized trading and payments.
This difference, as VET pointed out, is not easily conveyed without technical understanding. The XRP Ledger’s consensus protocol is complex, and explaining its layered safeguards against censorship requires familiarity with cryptographic validation, voting mechanisms, and principles of distributed agreement.
A Differentiated Model in Blockchain Design
By referencing David Schwartz’s earlier discussion, VET reaffirmed that the XRP Ledger’s consensus model is not only about efficiency or speed but also about governance transparency and the ability to expose any attempts at manipulation. This characteristic has allowed the XRP Ledger to maintain one of the earliest and most functional decentralized exchanges in the crypto industry.