Recently, I've been looking at governance votes for several projects again, and the more I look, the more I feel that delegation is quite subtle: at first, everyone says it's convenient and professional, but in the end, it just turns into a few people holding a bunch of votes, nodding to each other. To put it simply, governance tokens might not be governing the protocol itself, but rather "who's better at pulling votes, who has more time to monitor the forums."

In the past two days, the group has been full of discussions about stablecoin regulation, reserve audits, and various "de-pegging" reposts, and the emotions have suddenly risen. But when it comes to on-chain voting, it's the same group of big holders representing the "community" pressing confirm. Anyway, my expectations for governance are very low now; if I can participate, I will, but mostly I focus on managing my positions and security, and just wait it out.