Staring at the mempool all night, I casually checked a certain project's governance voting, and the votes were overwhelmingly one-sided. When I opened the address, I saw that most of the delegated votes were concentrated in the hands of those "familiar faces."

They say it's decentralized governance, but it actually looks more like outsourcing retail investors' voting rights... Everyone is busy mining/harvesting airdrops, too lazy to study proposals, so in the end, it becomes whoever has a louder voice, who holds the liquidity, or who can organize people to vote.

What's more awkward is that many proposals don't "govern the chain" at all, but rather govern distribution: how to adjust parameters, who to subsidize, how to split fees. Recently, the NFT royalty disputes have been fierce, claiming to protect creators, but in practice, they're afraid of scaring away secondary liquidity, so platforms and big players end up with more influence.
Anyway, when I see the words "vote passed," my first reaction isn't whether it's advanced or not, but: who was actually represented this time.