In the early morning, watching the waves crash back one after another, I suddenly thought about how, these past two days, reading DAO proposals is also a matter of “waiting”: waiting for others to take a stance first, waiting for the votes to cross the halfway mark, waiting for on-chain confirmation… To put it plainly, many proposals are written with ideals, but what’s really hidden is how the incentives are to be split—whoever ends up with the keys can define “public interest.” Some people say decentralization, but in practice, once you tweak the reward parameters and the voting thresholds, power quietly makes a comeback.

That inflation + studio + token price spiral also seems pretty similar to the way blockchain games work— the ones who run first are always the people who understand incentives best. Conclusion: When it comes to looking at DAOs, don’t just look at slogans. First, figure out these three things—“who contributes, who takes, and who can change the rules”—before you vote.