Lately, I've been a bit obsessed with DAO proposals. To be honest, many votes aren't about "whether to do the work," but about "who takes the keys" and "who gets the slices." Some are written very gently: incentivizing contributors, empowering the community... but upon closer inspection of the parameters, power is actually embedded in the committees, signers, and whitelists, and any changes afterward require their approval. The quiet times are actually the most dangerous. I often take screenshots and save multiple drafts so that after launch, changes won't make it seem like nothing ever happened.

Airdrop season is quite similar. The stricter the anti-witchcraft measures on task platforms, the more the points system resembles clocking in at work. Ultimately, who gets to define "activity" is essentially the same as who sets KPIs in a DAO. Anyway, when I look at votes now, I first consider how incentives are distributed, who can veto, and who can change the rules. Other promotional language is just background noise.