Lately, reviewing DAO proposals has been a bit exhausting... The writing is very righteous, but what really matters is how the incentives are embedded: who nominates, who executes, who gets the budget, who verifies KPIs. Basically, voting isn't about choosing "right or wrong," but more about selecting "who will have more influence in the future." Once some proposals pass, they automatically renew and distribute funds, which are the hardest to revoke.

By the way, the discussions in the group about funding rates are quite extreme, with everyone debating whether to reverse or continue to inflate the bubble. I think it’s very similar to DAO: when emotions are one-sided, the power structure is most easily solidified by the trend. Anyway, I’d rather go slow now, take a closer look at terms like "temporary authorization" and "emergency committee"... It’s a bit depressing, but at least I can see clearly where the dawn is coming from.