Recently came across a few DAO proposals, superficially written as gentle: optimization, strengthening, incentives... but upon reading the details, I found that the real drama is all about "who can get subsidies, who is qualified to vote, where the money goes after voting." Frankly, voting many times isn't about right or wrong; it's about redistributing power structures, using incentives to conveniently keep everyone's attention. Outside, people are still arguing that ETF capital flows are a switch for rises and falls, even using U.S. stock market risk appetite as an explanation. I can't help but laugh when I see that... On-chain, it's more direct: changing a parameter in a proposal could have an impact bigger than a week's candlestick chart. Anyway, I now see complexity as the enemy: first look at where the money and authority are leaning, then decide whether to join.