Recently looked at a DAO proposal, which on the surface seems quite "community-friendly," but in reality, it boils down to two core issues: who has the voting rights, and who has the switch to continuously issue tokens. I later realized that incentive design is actually the essence of the power structure—by only rewarding certain roles (like long-term lock-ups or specific delegates), even if you don't vote, you'll be marginalized; voting is just like stamping approval on a predetermined path. The inflation + studio model in blockchain games that leads to economic collapse is essentially the same: whoever controls the token issuance can decide what "activity" looks like. Anyway, I now focus on flipping through the pages about incentives and permissions first when reviewing proposals, and put other narratives aside for now.