Lately, looking at projects feels more and more like watching a weather vane… No rush to rush in, just wait for it to “stand firm” on one point first. To judge credibility, I think don’t just focus on what the official website is hyping, first check GitHub: it’s not about whether you understand the code, but whether it’s being continuously updated, whether anyone is genuinely submitting issues, and whether the merge records give that “last-minute burst” feeling right before launch. Also, don’t blindly trust audit reports as “audit passed = safe,” focus on a few key points: which modules are covered, whether high-risk issues remain unfixed, and whether re-audits have been done. Lastly, for permission upgrades, multi-signature is crucial—who’s involved, who are the signers, and whether they can change logic at will. Basically, “who holds the keys.” Recently, memes and celebrity endorsements have heated up again; when attention shifts, it’s easiest to end up being the last one to take the baton… I’ll just take it slow for now. That’s all for now. I’m going to check the history of a project’s multi-signature address in the browser.