"We lost, but we saw it clearly" The voting continues, but the result is likely to be decided. Cakepie DAO, this battle should be lost. When you think they are willing to communicate, the project party initiates a hasty governance proposal and makes a final decision; then puts down a light sentence "The compensation plan has been issued", which ends this top-down governance bullying. The community thought it was still in the game, but in fact it had been excluded from the poker table. When I came to my senses, there was only a notice left: "The vote has begun, you must nod." The most tragic thing is never the so-called "compensation" of $1.5 million, but the whole process, the DAO governance mechanism is in name only. Pancake knew who to talk to, but deliberately bypassed the community. Binance can handle this matter more decently, but chooses the most direct and naked way to manipulate it. They are not wrong, they are just too efficient, more efficient than at any time in the past few years. CZ just said "destruction is the most direct" while talking on Twitter, so some subjects who thought about the intention came to "search their homes under the order" and search the community's homes. They took only one week to quickly arrange, set the tone, vote, and close the door before public opinion broke out and before emotions were brewing. The applause CZ gave them in the comments should have made them very excited. While the community is still fighting for the right to communicate, they are already making closing statements. Arrogance is not in silence, but in silence. After all, with that man behind me, what does it mean to call me arrogant or not? What is chilling is that these firm supporters of the once "decentralized narrative" not only do not be ashamed of it, but instead regard it as a show of "governance efficiency". After all, in the process, even though you can speak out, I can pretend not to hear it; even though you can protest, I just need to bury you with a vote. The program is in, the DAO is in, but everything is the stage set they arranged. The so-called "community governance" has become a self-directed and self-acted script. This is not a failure, it is an insult. We see clearly: retail investors are not real participants, but are just arranged to play a role of "sense of participation". The struggles of retail investors are ridiculous and powerless. We have seen clearly: in the face of "decentralized governance", how power packages itself openly and then clears you out cleanly. We are not afraid of bear markets or storms, but we are afraid of every vote that the community has enthusiastically cast, which is ultimately just a performance arranged by power. If even DAO cannot bear fairness, then the ideal of Web3 will eventually be just another empty shell. If the rules can be trampled on as long as the result is good, then the rules will no longer be used to constrain the boundaries of the strong, but to decorate the scene of the strong's victory, and all justice will no longer exist. Never ask an institution/someone to be perfect. I just hope that big people can be more honest. I just hope that big institutions can learn to respect the community. The community can accept failure, but please don’t humiliate your belief in "fairness". Trust is scarce than a bull market. Consensus is more precious than narrative. And fairness is the last fig leaf for this industry. If you lose it, nothing will be left.