I tried once, specifically monitoring a project's treasury expenditures and milestones to see if they are truly "getting things done." Frankly, instead of watching their live streams and hype, I just checked on the blockchain: where does the money from the treasury go first, is it paid to product teams/auditors/infrastructure, or just a bunch of transfers that eventually end up in exchanges; then I compare it with their stated milestones to see if there are tangible signs like contract deployments, version updates, increased user interactions.

The most intuitive feeling from that time was: projects that are serious about their work tend to spend money quite inefficiently, their expenditure pace isn't frantic, and their launches might not be spectacular, but you can continuously see small, rapid progress. Conversely, those with grandiose milestone descriptions and frequent treasury movements make me feel a bit uneasy.

Recently, the group has been repeatedly discussing rumors about "stablecoin regulation," "reserve audits," and "de-pegging." When everyone's emotions flare up, they immediately want to switch positions. Actually, now I prefer to first take a look at: what assets does the project hold, whether they have public audits, and if they are transparent in explaining any turbulence... Anyway, better to hold back the panic for now.