Recently, the group has been talking again about whether anyone will move before and after the upgrade/maintenance of that mainstream public chain. Everyone is focused on the migration gossip, but I’m more interested in whether they “trust it or not.” Others think that having more GitHub stars and frequent commits means stability; in reality, many critical changes are hidden in multi-signature upgrades, and who signs it, whether there are thresholds, and if it can be replaced temporarily are the points that could wake you up in the middle of the night.

I don’t pretend to understand when reading audit reports myself: first look for the conclusions that say “unresolved/accepted risks,” then check on GitHub whether the subsequent changes were really implemented properly. A more basic approach: whether the upgrade permissions are single-signed or multi-signed, how many people, whether their identities are public, whether there is a timelock (which gives you reaction time), these are more reliable than “narrative.” To put it simply, audits are a bonus; multi-signature structures are the foundation… I just read and complain while doing so, that’s all for now.