Recently, I've been looking at governance of a few old protocols again, and the more I look, the more I feel that "delegated voting" is quite subtle: it's said to let people who don't want to worry about it hand their votes to someone more knowledgeable, but gradually it turns into a few people holding a bunch of delegated power, and no matter how fancy the proposals are, it seems like they're just asking, "Will you approve this time?" Who exactly does governance tokens govern... Honestly, in the end, it might be about governing the sense of participation.

In the past couple of days, after that mainstream blockchain upgrade/maintenance, the community started guessing whether the ecosystem would migrate. I also took a quick look: if the chain is peaceful, it's fine; but once there's any movement, everyone's first reaction is to see how a few big holders or major nodes respond, and ordinary users can only do their homework afterward.

Lowering my expectations made me feel lighter: I don't expect a single vote to change anything, so I just hold a small position to test the waters, occasionally cast an opposing vote as a reminder to myself. Anyway, cycles will repeat, but they won't be copied exactly, so that's how I'll proceed for now.