Last night, I reviewed a project's treasury expenditures, and the more I looked, the more it felt like a game of "spot the difference": on one hand, claiming that milestones are progressing, and on the other, large amounts being transferred to "advisors/marketing" in the wallet, then nothing more happened... I’m now too lazy to listen to their live stories; I’d rather check where the collateral is stored, whether there’s a clear liquidity exit for the funds, and if they can be withdrawn at any time. By the way, I want to complain that recently, the labels on those on-chain data tools have been criticized as "lagging/misleading easily," I’ve also fallen into that trap, so I can only check multiple addresses myself repeatedly.

To put it simply, when judging whether they are genuinely working, I trust two things more: where the money is spent, and whether the milestones are being fulfilled. If the expenses are concentrated on hard tasks like development/security/audits, and each milestone has corresponding on-chain actions or deliverables, it’s obvious without much hype; conversely, if the spending is floating around "partnership/ecosystem/growth" but there’s no verifiable tangible outcome, then it’s just prolonging the narrative. I would do the opposite, but I don’t hold a full position—leaving some bullets for when the project truly loses its anchor.