Today I looked at a DAO proposal, which on the surface says "optimize incentives," but basically means tying voting rights more tightly to rewards: if you don't lock your tokens or vote, you'll gradually be marginalized. I used to be quite impulsive, supporting proposals just because they offered "some sugar for voters," but after reviewing, I realized that sugar is just to lure you in; what's more important is who sits more securely behind the door... The power structure is all written in the parameters.

Recently, hardware wallets are out of stock everywhere, and phishing links are flying all over the group chat. The more times like this happen, the more you can see who truly cares about security and who is just talking the talk. Anyway, I’ve also come up with some "backup" ideas for myself: don’t rely solely on a big V or a proposal summary for judgment; look more at discussion forums and opposition opinions, treating them as emotional redundancy. Otherwise, when a perpetual wave of liquidation and a waterfall crash come, I might get nervous and click randomly again.