Recently, I’ve seen a bunch of delegated voting in project governance. To put it simply, it looks like “decentralization,” but in reality, the votes are concentrated in the hands of a few people. In the end, who exactly is the governance token governing?

Many people are too lazy to research and just delegate with a single click to big influencers or funds, aiming for convenience. The protocol looks stable, but over time, it starts to feel a bit like oligarchy.

Now I tend to treat governance as a risk factor, not consider “being able to vote” as a moat. Especially in the current macro environment, with expectations of rate cuts, the US dollar index, and risk assets all fluctuating together, when emotions run high, it’s easier to hand over power to “the most seemingly knowledgeable person.”
Anyway, I stick to my approach: keep smaller positions, set volatility limits, cut losses when needed, and even if governance gets lively, I don’t get into fights over it.