感谢所有参加这个讨论的伙伴们。因为有你们，这个社区才能在讨论中成型、进步。你们是社区的建设者。
Thank you to everyone who participated in this discussion. Because of you, this community has been able to take shape and progress through discussion. You are the builders of this community.
投票是 Community Fund DAO 中最重要，也最神圣的部分。投票意味着我们选择相信社区达成的共识，而不是某个组织或哲人王的裁决。
这不意味着我觉得中心化的决策不该存在。我们有星火计划，基金会也可以选择直接给项目资助（能透明些的话会更好）。这些渠道设计来就是为了高效地使用资金，但同时也连带着更多责任限制，避免盲目的、依个人喜好的浪费。
回到投票上，我坚信最重要的事情是尊重社区的意见。我们可以制作工具、写介绍文章来帮助社区成员在投票前对提案有更全面的了解；我们可以宣传提案的存在，让更多成员用自己投票的权利来帮助社区发展；我们可以从自己的角度分析提案对社区的帮助，说服其他人。
但在这个过程中，我们有不应该做的事情。总的来说，我们不应该以任何方式，显性地或隐性地帮助社区成员更「简单」或者「无脑」投票，这是对他们投票权利的玷污，是对认真思考后投票的人的侮辱。而借用权威组织的名义正是这样的行为：这些组织并没有权力告诉成员怎么投票，也不对投票的结果负责。这更多是要求对投票有影响力的组织注意到这件事、要求人们自我约束。
再次感谢所有参与讨论的伙伴。
Voting is the most vital and sacred part of the Community Fund DAO. It signifies our choice to trust the consensus reached by the community, rather than the judgment of a specific organization or a philosopher king.
This does not mean I believe centralized decision-making should not exist. We have the Spark Program, and the Foundation can also choose to fund projects directly (though more transparency would be even better). These channels are designed for the efficient use of capital, but they also carry stricter responsibilities and constraints to avoid blind or personal preference-driven waste.
Returning to the topic of voting, I firmly believe that the most important thing is to respect the community’s opinion. We can build tools and write introductory articles to help community members gain a more comprehensive understanding of proposals before they vote; we can promote the existence of proposals to encourage more members to exercise their right to vote for the community’s development; we can analyze how a proposal benefits the community from our own perspectives to persuade others.
However, there are things we should not do during this process. Generally speaking, we should not, in any way – whether explicitly or implicitly – help community members vote more “easily” or “mindlessly.” This is a desecration of their right to vote and an insult to those who vote after serious reflection. Borrowing the name of an authoritative organization is precisely such a behavior: these organizations have no authority to tell members how to vote, nor are they responsible for the outcomes of the vote. This is more about calling on organizations with influence over voting to take notice and practice self-restraint.
Once again, my thanks to all the partners participating in this discussion.