I look at whether projects are serious about their work, and I don't pay much attention to the milestones on paper. I first check where the treasury funds are spent: whether large transfers go to development/auditing/infrastructure, or if it's a bunch of "market collaborations" with funds layered and split across wallets. Today, I casually looked at the treasury of a certain L2 ecosystem project and saw a transfer of 1200 ETH first sent to a multi-signature wallet, then the next day divided into 6 transactions into the same newly deployed contract, which then swapped the funds into stablecoins to do "incentives"... Frankly, I would flag this kind of path with a yellow light. Genuine projects usually have a straightforward spending rhythm: audit reports match the version number, and if milestones are delayed, they explain why. Recently, with social mining and fan tokens—those "attention equals mining" schemes—I increasingly see them as budget drainers. It’s lively, but if the treasury burns through funds quickly and delivery doesn’t keep up, it’s quite risky. That’s all for now. If I see anything suspicious, I’ll speak up again.