Have you noticed that now, looking at a project’s “credibility” is like reading a bread machine manual? It’s not that mysterious, though. Don’t have new folks stare at ASTs or anything in that pile of GitHub code—just look at the update frequency and how fast pull requests get responded to. If the team hasn’t touched the code for a few months, yet they’re shouting about “technical breakthroughs” on Twitter every day, then it’s basically like the bread machine only bakes one side.

As for audit reports, don’t just look at the big-name logo on the cover. Flip to the pages on “exemptions” and “assumptions.” If they write a bunch of “it’s fine as long as nobody does anything malicious” type statements, then it’s basically telling you: “The bread machine works normally, but the door isn’t locked.”

Recently everyone has been complaining that MEV is tied to miner income, which makes transaction ordering fairness feel like a market fighting over discount specials. In fact, the number of multi-sig owners is a more solid indicator—if 3 out of 5 signers form an alliance, that’s more reliable than writing a 100-page whitepaper.

Anyway, my method: treat GitHub like a recipe, audit reports like quality inspection labels, and multi-sigs like an electronic lock. It won’t guarantee you’ll bake perfect bread, but at least it won’t blow up the kitchen.