☔️Across Protocol team manipulates DAO governance votes, misappropriating $23 million?
The incident once again reveals the core contradiction of DAO governance: the ideal of decentralization versus the reality of centralization. When a team can manipulate votes and misappropriate funds through shadow wallets, the so-called "self-governance" is just a carefully designed governance theater?
🩶Three key issues
1⃣Excessive concentration of token power
Governance tokens held by institutional investors and teams have instead become tools for "self-dealing"
2⃣Insufficient voting transparency
Current DAOs lack real-time voting traceability tools, making it difficult to identify manipulation behavior
3⃣Lack of oversight and checks and balances
Traditional industry's "self-dealing prohibitions" hardly exist in the crypto space
🐰The industry needs to move from romanticism to pragmatic reform. True decentralization is not about eliminating authority, but about designing technology to constrain power.
🍝The Across incident is not the first, nor will it be the last DAO governance failure case. But each crisis is an opportunity to drive the upgrade of governance paradigms—after all, the ultimate value of blockchain lies not in eliminating human weaknesses, but in making wrongdoing unprofitable.