Last night I reviewed a few more DAO proposals, on the surface they all sound like "for the betterment of the community," but my first reaction as a small fund player is still to look at how the incentives are distributed, who has the authority to issue them, and who can replenish after issuance... As I read through them, it starts to feel a bit like a company's overtime approval process, just replaced with on-chain signatures. Recently, I also heard about some regions increasing taxes and the regulatory environment shifting back and forth, which has made me more conservative about deposit and withdrawal expectations. Anyway, if it can be solved on-chain, I prefer to solve it on-chain; better not get stuck at the door in the end.

To put it simply, many DAO votes are not about "right or wrong," but about whether the power structure should be more centralized: who manages the treasury, who can change parameters, who gets emergency permissions, whether incentives encourage real usage or just boost TVL. My rule is: if a proposal just concentrates permissions in a few people or designs incentives that look like "grab and disperse," I basically won't support it; I will vote if I can, but I will withdraw once I’ve earned my share according to plan—don’t let "participation" tie you down.