Recently looked at several DAO proposals, and the more I look, the more I feel that voting isn't as simple as "everyone making decisions together." Many of the writing styles are actually secretly adjusting incentives: like who can get subsidies, whose votes are more valuable, how high the cost of opposition is... Basically, it's just a rebranding of the power structure. I'm most worried about those with a bunch of nice visions, but ultimately locking resources and permissions into a few addresses/small circles.

There are also people who keep an eye on large on-chain transfers, exchange hot and cold wallet movements, treating them as signals of "smart money." I now just see them as a thermometer of market sentiment. If I really want to participate in governance, I’d rather take it slow, first figure out who benefits from the proposal, the execution permissions, and how to roll back in case of failure—don't get carried away by a few charts and the hype. Anyway, I’ve cleared my position once, and I don’t want to be hypnotized again by K-line charts and slogans.