Recently browsing forums and checking on-chain voting records, the more I look, the more it sounds like the background noise of an old record: everyone talks about "governance," but the ones who actually press play are still those big addresses. Delegated voting was originally meant to prevent people from being too lazy to vote, but it gradually turned into "handing over votes to those who understand," and those who understand end up voting bigger and bigger, leading to oligarchic tendencies... To put it simply, governance tokens sometimes end up governing not the protocol, but the ranking of holdings.

What's more awkward is that the set of social mining and fan tokens—"attention is mining"—sounds lively, but when attention is concentrated, it's easier for a few people to set the rhythm. In the end, it still comes down to who can gather votes and who can control the narrative. Anyway, I don't dare get excited when I see high participation rates now; I prefer to watch the delegation flow first.

What I fear missing the most isn't actually the opportunity, but myself, who clearly sees the risks but pretends not to see them.