Reject 'Twitter Governance'! Caldera's $ERA

On-chain voting, transparency is the hard truth

After being involved in Web3 for a while, what annoys me the most are the 'Twitter Governance' projects—proposals rely on founders to tweet notifications, voting results depend on screenshots for public display, and everything is a black box operation, leaving retail investors without even the qualification to question. However, @calderaxyz's Caldera uses ERA on-chain voting to return governance to its 'transparent' essence, where every vote is clearly traceable; this is truly a reassuring approach. #caldera

When I previously participated in the funding allocation proposal, I specifically checked the voting records on-chain: every $ERA corresponds to clear voting options and times, with no signs of tampering; after the proposal passed, the flow of funds will also be disclosed regularly, so there's no worry about misappropriation. This kind of 'fully transparent process' is far more reliable than those 'verbal commitments.' What surprised me even more was that my opposing vote truly made a difference, and the project team publicly responded to community opinions; this kind of 'respect for retail voices' is too rare in Web3.

Of course, participating in governance also requires 'heartfelt engagement': one needs to seriously review the funding purposes and technical plans in the proposals, and shouldn't blindly follow trends to invest, or it will just waste the ERA in hand. But Caldera will announce proposals a few days in advance, giving users ample time to research, and will also answer questions in the community, reducing the difficulty of participation. @Caldera Official #caldera For users pursuing transparency, Caldera's ERA governance is not only a way to participate in the ecosystem but also a 'touchstone' for selecting reliable projects—if a project isn't even brave enough to be transparent about governance, how could it possibly be worthy of long-term trust?