Recently reviewing a few DAO proposals, on the surface they say "drive growth / build the ecosystem," but when you look closely at the budget sheet, you start to frown: who gets the initial incentives, who signs off on multiple signatures, who writes the execution report... Basically, it's writing the power structure into an Excel sheet. The most annoying are those that say "approve first, then refine," which ultimately become an endless cycle of refinement while the money has already been spent.

These days, someone also discussed whether projects will migrate before and after the upgrade of that mainstream public chain. I think whether they migrate or not isn't the key point; the real concern is whether the incentives will have to start over again after migration, and whether the original supervision mechanisms will be wiped out in the process. Forget it, to put it plainly: my vote against isn't because I love to argue, but because I don't want to see everyone using community funds to pay salaries to a few people, while also tightening the keys.