Looking at DAO voting, my first impression isn't the slogans, but rather the incentives: who gets the voting rewards, how to claim them, whether only "participation" is rewarded regardless of "quality," which can easily turn votes into task spamming.

Next, the power structure: proposal thresholds, delegated votes default flow, who holds emergency permissions—basically, whoever can set the agenda wins half the battle.
Recently, before and after the upgrade/maintenance of that mainstream public chain, everyone has been guessing whether projects will migrate or not.
I'm actually more concerned about whether governance provides a transparent path for "migration decisions," otherwise it ends up being a few people making the final call, and voting is just going through the motions.
Then, take a look at...