I’m now checking whether the project is actually getting things done—yet they start by looking at how the treasury is being spent instead. It’s not that money needs to be spent less; it’s that it should be spent “like hitting milestones.” For example, can each line item of spending be tied to specific deliverables (code, audits, data dashboards, ecosystem collaboration), do the timing points match the roadmap, and if they didn’t deliver, was there a post-mortem and did they cut the budget and re-prioritize? What I fear most is that kind of constant “strategic partnerships / market expansion,” while on-chain activity, development cadence, and response to outages/incidents never change.

Lately, the criticisms about restaking and shared security being like nested “stacking dolls” have also made me understand the frustration. The idea of compounding yields sounds appealing, but if all the treasury funds are used to subsidize yields and make short-term TVL look good, while the milestones stay vague, then that’s basically just buying time. Put simply: I’d rather wait and have the money spent on transferable, composable foundational capabilities—even if it moves slower.