I just closed the governance page... after browsing through some delegated votes, I feel a bit uneasy. To be honest, it seems that in the end, the governance tokens are not really "governing" the protocol's direction, but rather, whoever holds the most votes or can delegate the most votes gets the most influence. Everyone delegates with a click to save effort, but the more they delegate, the more it resembles oligarchy. No matter how well-written the proposals are, they can't escape the attitudes of those few addresses.

Recently, modularization and the narrative around the DAO layer are again popular. Developers look very excited, while users (including myself) mostly think, "So, what does this have to do with me?" Governance is the same—on paper, it's the community, but in practice, it feels more like responsibility is outsourced to a few people. Anyway, I still plan to bucket my votes as scheduled: vote myself if I understand, abstain if I don't, but at least don't mistake "participation" for security.