Last night I came across a DAO proposal, which on the surface was "optimizing incentives," but in reality, it subtly shifted voting power toward a few addresses: changing the delegation threshold, restricting subsidies to specific participation methods, and increasing the cost of opposing votes. To put it plainly, it's not a technical issue; it's a reshuffling of the power structure.

Now when I review proposals, I look for three things: who will receive continuous cash flow, who can more easily influence governance, and whether unlocking or issuing additional tokens is conveniently timed around voting periods. Recently, I also saw some regions raising taxes and tightening compliance regulations, then loosening them again. As people's expectations for deposits and withdrawals shift, on-chain sentiment becomes more prone to "lazy voting or just selling." Anyway, I've encountered this kind of well-packaged proposal three times now, so I prefer to take my time signing, first breaking down the incentives to understand them better.