Recently, I reviewed a few DAO proposals again, which on the surface are "parameter optimization/funding," but honestly, the real game is about how incentives are arranged and whose votes are more valuable. Once voting rights are tied too closely to subsidies, delegations, or even "participate and get a little," it easily becomes an automatic reinforcement of the power structure: old wallets are lazier and more stable, while newcomers are enthusiastic but their votes are like air.

By the way, seeing public opinion link ETF capital flows, U.S. stock risk appetite, and cryptocurrency price fluctuations into a single line, I want to go back to on-chain data: who is voting, and whether promises are fulfilled after voting. Anyway, I don’t really trust slogans when looking at voting now; I prefer to look at the distribution table and the retractable clauses to see if power can actually flow.