I'm starting to record some "credibility clues" for projects, otherwise every time I'm led by the narrative, I look back and don't know why I'm still holding the position. On GitHub, I currently focus on two things: whether someone is genuinely making changes continuously, and whether those changes have been reviewed; for those that haven't moved in half a year but suddenly have a big commit, I’ll first raise a question. Don't treat audit reports as talismans; the key is whether the issues are clearly written and whether there are records of subsequent fixes—it's not safe just to stamp a seal. Upgrading multi-signature is even more critical: who can sign, how many people are required, whether there's a delay period—basically, can you "one-click modify the contract" if something goes wrong. Recently, the disputes over privacy coins/mixing and compliance boundaries have been intense, but I care more about whether the team secretly changes permissions or rules when under pressure... record it, at least I can avoid being misled by stories.