Today I noticed a pretty awkward point during the review: governance voting is increasingly resembling a "delegated voting contest." If you don't delegate, your votes are too scattered to have any influence; if you do delegate, it's like packaging your voting power and handing it over to a few big players/institutions. Honestly, governance tokens might not be governing the protocol itself, but rather the voting structure.

What's even more embarrassing is that many people’s first reaction upon receiving tokens is "Can I sell them?" and they don't bother to read proposals at all. Especially with new L1/L2 projects launching incentives to boost TVL, veteran users complain about farming tokens and selling, which isn't without reason: the money is driven by subsidies, so they just delegate their votes to "seemingly professional" people, and the final voting outcomes often resemble oligarchic consensus.

I'm now a bit more calm about the words "governance": don't treat voting as democracy, and don't see delegation as a shortcut. If you really want to participate, I’d rather vote fewer times but think carefully about aligning the interests of stakeholders and incentives... otherwise, a bunch of people just click buttons, and it ends up having little to do with you. That's all for now; I’ll keep staying up late to watch the capital flows.