Lately, I've been a bit emotional about DAO voting: the more a proposal claims to be "for the community," the more I have to look twice at how incentives are distributed and who will execute them. Honestly, many times it's not about right or wrong, but about which side the power shifts a little towards... Some people get subsidies, some get permissions, and the rest get a sense of participation, which is normal, but don’t be fooled too seriously.

And now everyone is comparing RWA, the yields of US bonds, on-chain yield products all together. I can understand the anxiety and the desire to find a "more stable" option. But if a proposal suddenly includes profit sharing, whitelists, or parameter adjustments, it’s basically redrawing the map of interests. Anyway, before I vote, I always check: who benefits, who bears the risks, and who will take the blame in the worst case. If I don’t understand, I’ll just abstain. There’s really nothing shameful about it—don’t force yourself to vote just to keep up.