These days, I've been looking at several L2 DAO votes again, and the more I look, the more I feel that the proposal texts are actually "incentive and power structure manuals"... On the surface, they talk about optimizing transaction fees and subsidizing bridges, but upon closer inspection of the attachments: who can receive subsidies, how KPIs are set, whether voting rights are again concentrated in the hands of a few large players. To put it simply, it's not about "right or wrong," but about "who will have the final say in the future."

What's more awkward is that the community is still arguing over privacy coins/mixing and regulatory boundaries. Some proposals conveniently use "risk" as a reason, shifting resources toward easier approval paths, sounding quite righteous, but the result is that small teams find it even harder to get budgets. Before I vote now, I first look at where the money comes from, where it goes, and who the executor is... Otherwise, I just treat it as watching a show.