Lately, the more I observe governance, the stranger it feels: tokens are said to "give the community a say," but in the end, a bunch of people delegate their votes, and it turns into just a few addresses speaking on behalf of everyone. It's not entirely everyone's fault for being lazy; honestly, voting costs too much, information is scattered, and many just want to hand over the matter to "more professional-looking people" for peace of mind.

But long-term convenience can lead to oligarchy; on the chain, it looks democratic, but psychologically, it’s more like "I’ve outsourced my power." Especially these past couple of days, before and after the main public chain upgrade/maintenance, everyone’s speculating whether the ecosystem will migrate. The discussion is very heated, but when it comes to voting, it’s probably still just a few people making the final call... It’s a bit subtle.

What I care about now is: who exactly is governance tokens governing? Are they giving ordinary users a sense of participation, or are they providing a few people with a more respectable control panel? Anyway, I’ll try to delegate less, even if my votes are slower, at least I won’t hand over my "emotional repair" along with it.