Just flipped through a few DAO proposals, and the more I read, the more interesting it gets. On the surface, it’s about getting everyone to vote on a direction. But underneath, the incentives and power structure hidden behind it are far more complicated than the few lines written in the whitepaper.

Recently everyone keeps talking about staking unlocks and token unlock calendars—saying they’re worried about sell pressure. But it’s the same in DAOs too. The voting power in a proposal, in plain terms, is calculated based on token holdings. Big holders have a lot of votes, while retail’s votes—sometimes people can’t even be bothered to look at them. But on the flip side, if the proposal includes something like “lock-up rewards” or “governance token issuance,” then when you vote, you need to weigh it in your mind: is it really for the project’s benefit, or is it designed to get people to lock more tokens to reduce near-term sell pressure?

Anyway, my own habit is: when there’s a major proposal, I first look at the voting ratio, then quickly check who’s supporting it. If it’s all just a few big addresses casting votes, then I’ll be more cautious. I’m not saying I don’t trust the team—but long-term thinking isn’t only about faith; it also takes a bit of rationality. In a bull market, you can get sunburned—summer is still long.