I just saw a few L2s over there comparing TPS and fees. Honestly, the data looks quite impressive, but my first reaction was still to check their GitHub and audit reports. I’m not saying I don’t trust their marketing—it's just a habit to first see whether there are any cracks in the foundation.

As for GitHub, it can confuse beginners. Really, you only need to watch two things: first, the code update frequency—if there’s been no activity for half a year, the team might already be gone. Second, in the Issues section and the PR section, whether people are seriously discussing problems. If it’s all bots flooding the place with noise, then it’s basically just an empty shell.

Audit reports are even simpler. Flip to the page called “Risk Summary” and see whether any “Critical” or “High” level issues have not been fixed. If the audit firm is someone nobody has even heard of, or if the report is full of only “Informational” notices, then it’s basically the same as no audit at all.

As for upgrading multisig—plainly speaking, it’s about who holds the keys. If the multisig is 3/5, then among the five people, at least two should not be people from the team itself—preferably community representatives or well-known institutions. Otherwise, one day the team wants to change the rules; with a 2/3 approval, they can pass it directly, and retail users won’t even get a chance to shout.

Anyway, this is far more useful than looking at those flashy TPS numbers. Forget it—I know a lot of people get annoyed just hearing this, so I won’t talk more. I’ll keep watching my on-chain data.