The past couple of days, the group has been discussing stablecoin regulation, reserve audits, and various rumors about "de-pegging," and everyone is getting more and more anxious. I actually worry more about another kind of "de-pegging": DAO voting appears to be discussing parameters on the surface, but secretly changing incentives and power structures underneath.

Many proposals are written very gently, like "for a healthier ecosystem" or "encouraging long-term participation," but upon closer inspection, it's about who receives rewards, how voting power is amplified, who can propose and meet the thresholds... In plain terms, it's handing over the steering wheel to fewer people. You think you're voting on a plan, but in reality, you're signing off on future distribution charts.

Now I see that when voting activity picks up, it actually tends to slow down. First, consider this: after a proposal passes, who is more likely to get the money and influence? Don’t rush to follow the "everyone is voting" hype, especially when emotions have already been stirred by de-pegging rumors. The more excited you are, the easier it is to overlook that small fine print. That’s all for now.