I look at whether the project team is serious about their work, and I really don’t like listening to their milestone PPTs. Instead, I focus on how the treasury is spending money: funds are allocated to development, audits, infrastructure, and developer support—these “slow-paced” areas—rather than daily market launches, various collaborations, and conferences, which are lively but deliver nothing tangible. On-chain, what can be seen is visible; the rest should be clarified by them. It’s best if they can review monthly or quarterly, with stable expenditure rhythms and personnel changes that aren’t unreasonable—then it’s roughly reliable.

Recently, modularization and the DA layer have excited developers again, and it’s normal for users to be confused… Thinking about it later, it’s quite funny. Everyone talks about “future architecture,” but in the end, it still comes down to: where the money is spent and what is delivered. As for my own approach, it’s quite simple: keep a small position, add only after two or three milestones are truly achieved, and don’t get led by narratives.