Lately, the more I look at governance voting, the more awkward it feels: a bunch of people delegate their votes. They say it’s convenient, but really, it’s just packaging up their right to speak and handing it over to a few “resident big holders.” To put it plainly, who exactly are governance tokens governing…? Maybe what they’re really governing is the psychological burden of retail users: I participate, but the outcome is basically already decided.

As for me, before I transfer funds, I have to check the address three times. But when it comes to voting, a lot of people don’t even look at the delegation target’s history, related addresses, or whether they received any subsidies from the project team… they just click confirm. Anyway, in the end, oligarchization isn’t a conspiracy—it’s just the natural result of laziness plus an information gap.

These past two days, the funding rates have been at extreme levels. In the group chat, people are arguing about whether to reverse it or keep squeezing the bubble—I actually feel like it’s the same as voting: everyone thinks they’re making a choice, but in reality, they’re being carried along by the rhythm set by a few large positions. Going forward, I’d rather vote less, but every time I make sure to read the delegation, the authorization, and the signature contents clearly—don’t treat “governance” like just signing in.