Recently looking at several DAO proposals, it’s a bit like opening blind boxes: on the surface, they say “optimize incentives,” but upon closer inspection of attachments and parameters, it’s actually about who can get emissions, who can enter the whitelist, and who has veto power. To put it plainly, voting isn’t just “support/oppose,” it’s about embedding power structures into the contract, and the cost of changing your mind later is very high.

I will first ask myself: what behavior is this proposal actually rewarding?
Answer: Usually not “contribution,” but “taking sides” and “liquidity,” the earlier and louder you are, the more you benefit.

By the way, I saw that the funding rate is again extreme, and there’s a debate in the group about whether to reverse or continue squeezing the bubble. I’m actually more concerned about whether, in such times, DAOs will push through “emergency proposals” to change rules. When emotions run high, people are more likely to overlook the fine print. Anyway, before I vote, I first check the beneficiary address and the lock/unlock schedule, or I just pretend I didn’t see it… that’s it for now.