After checking the voting records of a few DAOs, I found it pretty interesting. On the surface, it’s all about “community self-governance,” but once you go into the proposals, you can see the incentive design is heavily skewed—big holders lock up tokens for weighted voting, while small retail investors can’t be bothered to work out those formulas. In any case, voting won’t change anything.

Recently, the whole privacy coin controversy has been stirring things up. Some people think coin mixing is a necessity, while others are afraid of stepping over the line. Personally, I think the “compliance anxiety” in DAOs is even more obvious—many proposals are plainly trying to avoid risk, but the wording is wrapped in a way that’s especially friendly to the community. Basically, the power structure hasn’t changed; it just uses different phrasing to get you to accept it.

My position isn’t heavy, so in situations like this, I’ll just watch and stay put. Discipline matters more than intuition. That’s it for now.