Recently reviewing the voting delegation data of several projects, the more I look, the more uncomfortable I feel: everyone says it's "community governance," but the votes are all being swept up by a few big players/institutions with a single click, and no matter how beautifully the proposals are written, it feels like just going through the motions. To put it plainly, who exactly is the governance token governing? Maybe it's governing people like me who are too lazy to monitor forums, outsourcing the power, and in the end, there's no way to back out.

Plus, recently some regions have been tightening and loosening regulations on taxes and compliance, causing expectations around deposits and withdrawals to fluctuate. People are more inclined to delegate their votes to those who seem more stable, making oligarchic control even smoother. I’ll just first clearly list the risk factors: who can change the rules, who can pause the system, who holds most of the votes… survive first, then talk about profits.

But I still believe that at least laying out the power structure on the chain is a bit better than the traditional black box.