I used to always say "I only look at on-chain data," thinking that data wouldn't lie.

But when the airdrop season arrived, I was proven wrong: the anti-witch rule was changed, task platforms adopted a points system, and even the "cleanest" on-chain addresses looked like they were clocking in at work, but in the end, they could still be cut off with a single strike...
Emotions also matter; at least you can sense the trend in advance.

Back to modular chains, the biggest change for end users, I feel, is just two words:拆开 (拆开 - "disassemble" or "break apart").
After separating execution, data, and settlement, users might only see it as "cheaper and faster / switching networks," but the real experience becomes: the same app might span several layers, with bridges, proofs, latency, finality—these pitfalls are easier to step into.
The upside is more gameplay options and lower costs; the downside is that you think you're using one chain, but in reality, you're in love with a bunch of components, and the chances of conflicts increase.

My current approach is pretty straightforward: for new projects, I not only look at TVL and active addresses but also check which DA they rely on, which bridges they use, and what incidents have occurred...
If I get it wrong, I change it; don’t be stubborn. After all, in the end, you’re the one paying the price.