@Bedrock
I’ve noticed that the clearest gap between participant incentives and protocol needs tends to appear around liquidity expectations.
Most users entering Bedrock want uniBTC to remain productive, liquid, and available for redeployment at any moment. That flexibility is part of the appeal.
The protocol however, benefits when capital behaves predictably enough to support long term security commitments and credible validator participation.
Withdrawal queues sit right at the intersection of those incentives. The more participants optimize for frictionless exits and rapid capital rotation, the harder it becomes to distinguish committed security from liquidity that is only temporarily passing through the system.
That's where capital efficiency starts competing directly with validator credibility.