Recently, I've been looking into that "queue jumping" in MEV, which basically means whoever gets packaged first can eat a little more. The biggest impact isn't actually on those flashy bots, but on regular people: you think that just pressing confirm means you're in line, but in reality, your transaction is being watched in the mempool, slippage is being increased, your trade gets squeezed out, or it even fails outright with no refund... It’s hard not to feel frustrated about this.

What's more subtle is that many protocol governance documents mention "fairness" and "transparency," but the right to order transactions is usually handed over to block proposers or relays by default, and community discussions rarely treat it as part of the broader incentive structure. Recently, incentives on testnets and token expectations have been quite intense; everyone is speculating whether the mainnet will issue tokens. But once they do, the same queue jumping issues can't be avoided: whoever is better at jumping the line is more like a "diligent user."

Anyway, before I vote, I always look for one sentence: does the proposal explicitly acknowledge the existence of "queue jumping," or does it pretend it doesn't exist? The fairness that ultimately gets implemented often hides within this queue jumping.