Recently looking at several DAO proposals, on the surface they all say "increase participation" and "motivate the community," but basically it's turning the voting button into a coin slot: you vote for me, I give you some sugar, but who issues the sugar, who receives it, and how long it lasts are the real power structures. The funniest part is that the parameters are hidden very deeply; once the reward curve changes, the whales' "governance enthusiasm" immediately returns... hmm, what a coincidence.

By the way, watching Layer 2 projects argue over TPS, fees, and ecosystem subsidies also seems like a promotional version of governance proposals: the data looks good, the subsidies are generous, but in the end, it's still about who can lock the "budget" and "voice" in their hands. Anyway, right now I look at who proposes the proposal first, who signs it, and who can change the rules; otherwise, the next liquidation might require wearing a raincoat on governance.