Recently, I've been looking at governance votes for several projects again, and they say it's "community decision," but once voting starts, the votes just flow like water toward a few major addresses... Others think voting is about everyone deciding the direction together, but in reality, it’s more like choosing who will be the "proxy voting manager." I'm not against delegation; after all, it's too idealistic to expect everyone to read proposals. It's just that the more I look, the more it seems like a gentle form of oligarchy: if you don't participate, you’re implicitly authorizing the person who can rally the most votes.

What's more awkward is that on-chain data tools are now being criticized for lagging labels and possibly misleading, so our judgment of "who is voting and representing whom" is already foggy. Anyway, my current approach is pretty simple: focus less on the hype, pay more attention to rule changes I can understand, and if I can't vote, I won't force it—don't hand over your brain just for a sense of participation. That's all for now.