Lately, I find governance voting a bit annoying, many people talk about "decentralization," but their actions are quite honest, entrusting votes to a few big accounts, ending up like… either…: like a neighborhood homeowners' association election, or like handing the remote control to the loudest person. Honestly, who are governance tokens really governing? Most of the time, they’re not governing the protocol, but rather the laziness and fear of trouble among retail investors.

What's more embarrassing is that once delegation forms a path dependency, those few addresses seem to represent "consensus" no matter what they say, and if you don’t follow, it looks like you don’t understand. The dispute over NFT royalties is even more obvious: on one side, calling for creators to earn income, and on the other, complaining that secondary liquidity is being dragged down; in the end, voting results often depend on who holds more chips and who has stronger influence.

I now basically avoid that narrative of "voting is necessary to participate," preferring to sign myself if I can, layering wallets, minimizing permissions when possible… Anyway, I’d rather miss airdrops than easily hand over decision-making power. That’s all for now.