To see if the project team is serious about their work, I usually don't look at slogans first; I directly examine how the treasury is spent and whether there is tangible progress after the funds are used. Ideally, the chain from "milestone → unlock budget → deliverables verifiable" should align with: code merge records, version upgrades, audit reports, documentation, and compatibility notes. Even if progress is slow, as long as each step can be reproduced and scrutinized, I’m willing to trust a bit more. Conversely, treasury expenditures are always grouped into broad categories like "market cooperation/eco incentives," and if the milestones are all "Qx completed xx" but nothing matches on-chain or in the repository, it becomes quite awkward. Recently, some people have been complaining that on-chain data tools and tagging systems are lagging and can be easily manipulated, so I now prefer to cross-verify a few large expenditures myself rather than rely on others’ "labeled conclusions." What about you?