Recently, I looked back at a few more DAO proposals. On the surface, they’re all about “promoting the ecosystem” and “incentivizing growth.” In plain terms, it’s about how power is divided—how the keys end up in whose hands—hidden behind a pile of polished words. The voting days are the most lively, but in reality, most people only pay attention to whether they can get something out of it, while the few lines that actually change the rules are hardly looked at. Thinking about it later, it’s pretty funny.

Especially when new L1/L2 projects launch aggressive incentives to pull in TVL right away—veteran users complaining about “mine, sell” isn’t without reason. You think you’re voting on “the future,” but really you’re having a short-term liquidity exit tunnel carved out for it. Anyway, when I look at votes now, I check two things first: who proposed it, and where the execution power lands; and after the incentives are issued, whether what’s left is users—or just a bunch of empty addresses. Being a “blockchain archaeologist” during the bear market for so long has made me trust cycles, not promises.