Recently, I reviewed a few DAO proposals again, and on the surface, they all seem to be "for the betterment of the ecosystem," but a closer look at how incentives are distributed, who has nomination rights or veto power, you can basically guess which way the power will shift later. To put it simply, voting is not just about expressing an opinion; it's also about endorsing a certain distribution method.

These days, everyone compares RWA, the yields of US bonds, on-chain yield products, and so on. I also feel tempted, but the more I look, the more I realize: behind the returns, who bears the risk and who holds the voice are often written in the fine print of the proposals.

In the past, I always wanted to chase an explanation for every outcome, but now I’ve somewhat let go of that—I'm no longer seeking explanations; if it’s random, then it’s random... I’ll slowly add to my positions, use low leverage, participate in what I can understand, and avoid throwing myself into incentives designed by others.