When liquidity rates hit an extreme, my first reaction isn't "rush in and take a bite," but rather ask myself: is this wave driven by emotional pressure, or is it a structural issue? To put it simply, whether you can take the other side depends on whether you can withstand it and continue through the more extreme phase... I've seen too many people hold on stubbornly despite absurdly high rates; it's not that they're wrong about the direction, but that they've wasted time.

Personally, I prefer to "avoid volatility first," especially when holding a large position, I honestly reduce some and keep a position for observation. If I really want to take the other side, it's not about bottom-fishing with reckless enthusiasm; I need clear stop-loss and retreat routes. Otherwise, it's like cross-chain routing—if you get stuck, you might think it's just a delay, but in the end, you'll find it's a design flaw with no rollback option.

By the way, recently, the social mining/fan token approach of "attention as mining" looks lively, but attention itself also has a funding rate: the more noise, the more expensive it gets; the more expensive, the easier it is to get squeezed out. Anyway, I now prefer to earn a little less rather than gamble on uncontrollable volatility just for that small fee. That's how I see it for now.