Lately, I've been getting a bit fed up with voting on DAO proposals. To be honest, many aren't about "discussing directions," but about redistributing the cake: who can propose, who can modify parameters, who gets incentives, who makes the decisions. The terms are written very gently, but once incentives are tied to voting rights, the power structure quietly takes shape. Now, with new L1/L2 projects launching aggressive incentives to attract TVL, it's normal for old users to complain about "mining, dumping, and selling." Incentives come quickly and go just as fast, and governance often becomes harder to change later. Anyway, before I vote now, I first look at: who benefits from the incentives, how long they are locked, and whether there's an exit mechanism. If I don't understand, I won't vote—I'd rather earn a little less coffee money. Next time, I plan to keep track of the "beneficiaries" behind each proposal. How do you usually judge whether such proposals are genuinely constructive or just consolidating power?