Recently, I've seen a bunch of project governance votes again, superficially on-chain democracy.

But when I click in, it's all delegated voting, and in the end, just a few big addresses hold the power...
Honestly, who does the governance tokens really govern? It might just be the retail investors' "sense of participation."
I'm not against delegation, after all, everyone doesn't have time to monitor proposals every day, but long-term delegation can easily lead to oligarchization:
You delegate your votes, and others can conveniently use them for other gambits, making it hard for you to hold them accountable.

Lately, phishing links have been rampant again, hardware wallets are out of stock, and many people are busy protecting themselves (authorizations, signatures, fake sites).
Governance now feels more like "I'll just click agree so I won't be bothered."
My current approach is very cautious: I avoid long-term delegation if possible, and if I do delegate, I regularly check what the other party has voted on.
Revoke permissions when necessary, even if it means losing some airdrops, because I don't want to wake up one day to find I've helped someone monopolize the system.