Recently, I've been looking at governance votes for a few protocols again, and honestly, it's a bit like "delegated voting = handing your vote to someone who can speak better," which gradually leads to oligarchic control: who exactly is the governance token governing? Most people are busy watching K-line charts, so few actually vote, and the votes end up concentrated in a few addresses/representatives. They may not be bad, but narratives and interests are easily tied together.

On the macro side, things are also quite awkward. When expectations of rate cuts emerge, the US dollar index and risk assets often rise and fall together, feeling like the market sentiment is being turned on by the same hand... On-chain governance's "decentralized" narrative sounds lofty, but in practice, it still depends on distribution and participation.

To avoid impulsive orders, my simplest habit now is: when I see a "major proposal/new narrative," I don't act immediately. I put it on my watchlist and check again after a while; if I still feel excited the next day, I consider a small position to try, otherwise, I just forget it.