2026-01-15 01:35:48

Seemingly complex statements actually hide a power game. The concepts of "public interest" and "common interest" are essentially the same— the only difference is who holds the right to define them. The party that controls the discourse can decide what each term represents, thereby shaping the logic of power distribution. This is especially evident in DAO governance and community decision-making: the same proposal, wrapped in different rhetoric, can lead to completely opposite voting outcomes.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

19 Likes

Reward
19
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

BitcoinDaddy

· 01-17 14:22

Really, the right to speak is power, and this is vividly reflected in on-chain governance.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropHunter007

· 01-15 02:05

I have seen many cases where DAOs are messed up by this set of rhetoric. It's really the same proposal, just rephrased, that can reverse the voting outcome.

View OriginalReply0

StakeOrRegret

· 01-15 02:02

The art of phrasing is truly an art form. I've seen so many DAO proposals get reverse-voted just because of the wording...

View OriginalReply0

ProofOfNothing

· 01-15 02:00

Yes, that's right. Persuasion is power, and this is most evident during our community votes.

View OriginalReply0

InscriptionGriller

· 01-15 01:39

Oh no, I know this trick too well. The big players in the DAO can turn the tide with just a change in wording, while the retail investors have to desperately vote for the "common interest." Vocabulary power is speech power, and speech power is a cutting knife—simple and brutal.

View OriginalReply0