Lately, I've been a bit discouraged about governance voting... They say it's "community decision-making," but in the end, a bunch of people delegate their votes, leaving only a few big accounts to make the calls. You ask who the governance tokens are really governing? Honestly, it might have first governed "me, who couldn't be bothered to read proposals," and in the process, concentrated power even more securely.

I usually take a contrarian approach, slowly picking up positions during times of panic, but governance isn't as romantic as it sounds. Delegation is supposed to be convenient, but over time it leads to oligarchization. No matter how well-written the proposals are, the direction can easily be swayed by the preferences of just a few people.

Also, recently someone was complaining about the lag in the tagging system of on-chain data tools and how it might mislead people. I was a bit slow to catch on... I often only remember to check whale addresses every couple of days, and when the tags change, I’m left confused: who’s really acting? Anyway, now I trust my own ability to interpret on-chain activity more. Voting? If I can click myself, I do; if I can't, I stop dreaming about "participating in governance." That’s all for now.