Lately, I've been a bit obsessed with DAO voting proposals, saying they are "to incentivize contributors," but upon closer inspection, it's really about who can access the funds and who can approve or veto. I later realized that many people arguing are not concerned with parameters; they're afraid that the power structure is being quietly shifted: who controls the addresses issuing rewards, whether multi-signature thresholds are lowered, whether emergency permissions have gained an extra key... These issues are more critical than whether the incentives are sufficient. On the macro side, there's also talk about easing expectations, the US dollar index moving up and down with risk assets, and people's emotions easily being manipulated, but proposals still need to be grounded in facts: where permissions are changing from and to, who can veto, and who takes responsibility if something goes wrong. Anyway, my first look at a proposal now is to check for permission changes, then look at the funds.