This morning, I casually made a few large transfers, then casually looked at a DAO proposal. The more I read, the more I feel that voting is just "community consensus" on the surface, but underneath, it's really about how incentives are divided and who has the final say. For example, writing rewards as "participation subsidies," but once the threshold is raised, only a few can claim it; adding a delegation mechanism makes it so that whether retail investors vote or not doesn't matter much... Basically, the power structure is already set, and voting is just a rubber stamp. The group is still discussing stablecoin regulation, reserve audits, and de-pegging rumors. When everyone's emotions run high, they want to "express an opinion quickly or escape quickly," but I now prefer to look at the rules first: who can change parameters, and who benefits from those changes. Anyway, I personally look at the incentive clauses first in proposals, then the length of the voting period, and finally the appealing vision.