I always feel like in many projects, the "governance" ultimately isn't about the protocol, but about retail investors' patience... Delegated voting was originally meant to increase participation, but it gradually turns into a few big whales/institutions exchanging votes with each other. No matter how beautiful the proposals are written, the outcome is usually predictable. Frankly, those votes you hold are more like endorsements, not truly capable of influencing anything.

What's even more awkward is that everyone heavily relies on on-chain data tools and address labels to judge "who's voting" and "who's forming factions," but if the labels lag behind or are intentionally misled by siloed accounts, even bystanders can get misled. Anyway, when I look at governance tokens now, I first ask: can the key permissions be securely held by a few people? If yes, then don't get self-congratulatory—manage your positions based on risk, not slogans.