To see if the project team is actually working seriously, I now mostly skip the roadshows and directly review the treasury expenditures and milestone reconciliations.

Where is the money going: is it continuously invested in deliverable areas like core development, audits, and infrastructure, or is it just a bunch of market, consulting, and ecosystem incentives being randomly distributed, with KPI achievements all relying on "narrative" spin?
Milestones shouldn't be written off as "in progress/completed" in a vague way; can they be linked to verifiable deliverables (code, deployment, parameter changes, actual expenses) so that you can tell at a glance?

Recently, the "yield stacking" approach of pledge/sharing security has been criticized as a copycat, and I think the criticism is justified: if the treasury still uses funds to subsidize this kind of illusion of returns, it’s basically using cash flow to prolong emotional hype.
The most concerning thing in governance proposals is seeing "distribute funds first, then see the results."

Next time, I will roughly categorize the treasury’s expenditures over the past 3-6 months and compare them with on-chain costs and milestone progress;
What signals do you usually use to judge whether the team is actually working or just dragging their feet?