Recently, I’ve also seen someone delegate all governance votes to “professional representatives,” saying it’s more convenient and saves effort. I admit it’s convenient, but the more convenient it is, the more it feels like handing the keys to a stranger: in the end, is it the tokens that govern, or is it just a few addresses that govern? The voting page looks pretty democratic, but once you pull up the delegation relationships on-chain, it’s basically those same big players rotating back and forth, and the oligarch vibe is really strong. When the expectations of interest rate cuts change, or the US Dollar Index throws a tantrum, risk assets move up and down together—at times like this, it’s even easier to lose focus and put all your attention on “people who can help you win,” so governance is even less likely to be watched carefully. (Bullet comment: Don’t mistake laziness for maturity.) My current approach is really old-school: I’d rather vote less than blindly delegate. Before delegating, at least check the other party’s historical voting record and whether their identity is publicly disclosed; if wallet permissions can be kept to a minimum, then keep them to a minimum—especially those “claim voting rewards” links, which are, for the most part, phishing.