Right now, I’m checking whether the project team is "serious or not," rather than looking at the milestones in the PPT. I prefer to review the treasury expenditures: where the money was spent, whether it was done with proper rhythm. To put it simply, all expenses are lumped into "market cooperation/consultant fees/ecosystem incentives," which I see as just buying hype; meanwhile, the less glamorous costs like development audits, infrastructure, and bug bounties are the real work.

Don’t just look at whether the milestones are just empty promises; check if there are explanations when delays happen, whether the scope was clearly cut, and avoid saying you’re sprinting while adding new storylines… Even I, a meme enthusiast, can’t keep up with that.

Recently, the disputes over privacy coins/mixing compliance have caused a lot of tearing apart, which actually serves as a mirror: when a project hits boundary issues, it’s a big difference whether they pretend to be dead or actually communicate clearly, explain their route, and lay out the risks transparently. Jokes aside, don’t treat your positions as a joke—set your stop-loss properly. We’ll talk more about this next time.