Recently, I’ve been looking through the governance records of a few more projects, and the more I read, the more it feels like “delegated voting” outsources everyone’s sense of participation... They claim it’s decentralized, but in the end, it’s usually the same set of long-term whales and proxies that get to govern. If ordinary people don’t vote, they can’t get past the mental hurdle; if they really do vote, the process is so drawn out that they feel like they’re just endorsing someone else.

Not to mention the on-chain data tools and tagging systems—people complain that they’re lagging behind, and they could even be used to mislead. When I look at delegated addresses, I’m also pretty conflicted: the tag says “community representative,” but representative of whom, exactly? I can trace the routing step by step, but the way voting power gets transferred feels more like a black box.

For a while, I was really interested in this kind of “governance analysis” content, thinking it could help me make up for some information gaps; later, I found that it’s so easy for emotions to be steered, and I started to unfollow. Anyway, my approach is more conservative now: if I can read the contract/proposals myself, I do; if I really don’t have time, I simply don’t pretend to actively participate—so I don’t end up adding bricks to oligarchic dominance.