Recently reviewed several DAO voting proposals, and the more I look at them, the more they seem like "aunties" gossiping at the market: on the surface, talking about parameter optimization and contract upgrades, but underneath, they're actually dividing tokens and seating arrangements... The incentives are written very nicely, but you need to see clearly who has voting rights, who gets dividends, and who can change the rules at any time. Especially when those "temporary subsidies / special committees" appear, the power structure quietly solidifies, making it hard to overturn later.

These past two days, everyone has been discussing interest rate cut expectations, the US dollar index, risk assets rising and falling together, then diverging again. Honestly, when emotions run high, many people are too lazy to read the detailed proposals and just follow the crowd to vote. Anyway, I’ve gotten used to first mapping out a small relationship chart of key addresses and fund flows, seeing who aligns with whom, then deciding whether to click "Approve."

For now, I’ll withdraw the old authorizations from a few suspicious contracts so that I won’t be caught off guard if a proposal passes someday.