Recently, I've been looking at some governance voting again, and the more I look, the more I feel that "delegation" is essentially just packing power and handing it over to a few people; it's not surprising if it eventually becomes oligarchic.

Who exactly do governance tokens govern? Most of the time, they govern the psychology of retail investors: making you feel like you're participating, but the votes have already been locked by a few addresses plus a few "representatives."
What's even more ridiculous is that many on-chain data tools and tagging systems are still criticized for being outdated or even misleading; if you judge the governance landscape based on tags like "whales are doing this," what you see might already be an old script.
My partner also asked me: You keep saying you'll exit according to plan, but can you really follow the plan when it comes to voting? I can only say... vote when you can, don't delegate if you don't have to, and if you do delegate, you need to clearly specify the trigger conditions; otherwise, in the end, you won't even know who is actually "governing" you.