I think whether the project team is actually doing work can be best observed by monitoring the treasury expenditures and whether the milestones match up, besides just looking at the roadmap: after the money is spent, in one or two weeks, check if there are corresponding updates on the blockchain, repositories, or documentation. To put it simply, it's not "spending money = progress," but whether the spending rhythm aligns with the delivery rhythm, especially for audit fees, business development collaborations, and market-making budgets, which are most likely to become long-term "pending outputs."

Recently, before and after the upgrade of that mainstream public chain, everyone has been guessing whether they will migrate. I actually want to see if the ecosystem projects' treasury has clear expenses for "migration/compatibility," or if they just talk about it casually. If they really move, testing networks, bridges, front-end, and risk control parameters all need to be changed; it’s impossible to do all that without spending money.

I'll first compare the multisig transaction flows of a few projects with their most recent milestones, and note any abnormal expenditure timings. That’s all for now.