Recently, I’ve been watching whether project teams are serious about their work, focusing on one point: whether the treasury spending is tightly linked to milestones. To put it plainly, don’t just announce “funding approved” and then have monthly reports full of flowery words; I prefer those that break the funds into several segments, each corresponding to verifiable deliverables (code, audits, mainnet metrics, etc.), with an automatic halt to payments if not achieved. If the treasury’s expenditures are always just “operations” or “ecosystem collaborations” in broad categories, and on-chain transactions show no tangible results, I’ll just assume the fog in the mine is too thick and first turn off the miner’s lamp.

By the way, in the past couple of days, the group has been arguing fiercely about privacy coins and mixing compliance boundaries. I’m actually more concerned about whether projects using treasury funds to touch these sensitive areas have clear risk mitigation plans, or if they’re just gambling on hype. If they hit a landmine once, no matter how they change the airdrop rules afterward, it won’t be recoverable… Anyway, I’d rather miss out than get involved in a “treasury fireworks” scheme.