Aave recently had an awkward number in a governance proposal: a 41% abstention rate.

This number is more painful than a rejection vote. What does it prove? Nearly half of the holders simply choose not to vote. Not oppose, just too lazy to bother.

The core issue isn't about power distribution, but the proposal itself—"Should the DAO fully take over brand assets?" Ordinary participants find this overwhelming; it's too complex, involves too many aspects, and the cost of accounting is too high, so they give up.

The reason governance becomes a burden is because everything is lumped into one big vote. The result? Fewer and fewer participants.

So how to fix it? The answer is simple: break down power.

There's a strategy worth considering. Break a big issue like brand management into smaller, actionable units. Who manages social accounts? Should the community review the brand visuals? Who has the final say on website content?

With this approach, even if you only hold a few tokens, you can vote on the small module you care about. No need to understand the entire ecosystem, just make decisions in your own domain.

What’s the effect? Voting participation skyrocketed to 87%. The community isn't truly indifferent; it just needs an "accessible" way to participate.

What’s the next step for optimization? Governance automation.

成熟的DAO no longer relies on manual voting but builds a self-operating system. The opinions of long-term contributors carry more weight, and once a proposal passes, the process is automatically triggered without additional votes. This not only protects the voice of core contributors but also reduces the decision-making cost for ordinary participants.

From 41% to 87%, it may seem like just a percentage change, but it actually reflects the ultimate issue in DAO governance: it's not about power, but about participation barriers.