Lately, I find DAO voting a bit frustrating: proposals are written to sound "for the good of the community," but once you turn to the incentives page, the truth starts to show—how voting rights are distributed, how rewards are issued, who can change parameters, basically locking in the power structure. To put it simply, some proposals aren't about solving problems; they're about legitimizing the privileges of a small circle. On-chain data doesn't lie; you can easily see who is pushing things by tracking how large addresses move before and after votes, whether funds are flowing back, etc. By the way, there's also chatter outside about rate cut expectations, the US dollar index rising and falling with risk assets—I care more about the mood heating up, because DAO's "democratic facade" becomes easier to package. Anyway, I still believe: putting rules on the chain means at least people can watch and criticize, and be forced to make changes.