I'm now observing whether the project team is "serious or not," and I actually don't trust the milestones in the PPT anymore. First, I check how the treasury spends: Are the funds unlocked in stages? Is there a fixed spending rhythm? What percentage is allocated to salaries/audits/infrastructure? I'm most afraid of those who just send a lump sum to "partners" with no follow-up... To put it simply, I'm not afraid of slow milestones; I'm afraid that the spending trajectory doesn't match the actual work trajectory.

There's also a small point: When the chain is congested, do they come out to fix parameters, update documentation, or improve monitoring, or do they just pretend nothing's wrong? Recently, the privacy coin/mixing compliance debates have caused community splits. I can understand both sides, but if a project doesn't dare to clearly define "how to handle compliance boundaries and how to warn users about risks," then even with a huge treasury, it's like gambling. Anyway, I prefer to see them do less hype and deliver more. It's okay to be slow.