Recently, looking at DAO proposals feels a bit like opening blind boxes: on the surface, it says "optimize incentives" and "increase participation," but after flipping to the attachments, you realize that how rewards are distributed, who can claim them, and who has the authority to change parameters basically outline the power structure. Especially those cases where "temporary permissions are given to core contributors first, and governance will reclaim them later," I tend to watch those more closely... I see simplicity as a trap, and the phrase "for efficiency" can really hide a lot of things.

By the way, I thought of how everyone has been complaining lately about validator/miner income and MEV causing unfair ordering—it's actually quite similar to DAO: whoever gets the "first to see, first in line" position can more securely capture incentives. Anyway, before I vote, I check three things: where the money flows, who holds the keys, and whether it can really be reclaimed in the future. If I don't understand, I just abstain; it makes me feel more at ease.