Such awkward incidents are not uncommon in DAOs—just after a vote ends, someone suddenly digs up the "original version" claiming the rules have been changed. Then the group descends into chaos, each person presenting different screenshots as irrefutable evidence, and in the end, no one can figure out who is right.

The root cause isn't the governance design itself; the problem lies in the lack of a place to store "evidence." All proposal parameters, data tables, member lists, calculation logic, audit records—without a stable, traceable storage layer, the entire process is deadlocked by version confusion.

Here's an idea to try—imagine on-chain data storage as the company's "file room." During due diligence, you'll understand that what truly reassures people isn't how brilliant the fundraising pitch was, but the stack of original vouchers in the data room that can be matched to the accounts. The on-chain world needs this too.

Imagine if, in the future, more protocols store governance attachments, rule versions, and allocation details on reliable on-chain storage solutions—what would happen? Community discussions would turn into reviewing verifiable case files, rather than a group of people throwing screenshots at each other and arguing. Pinning all evidence before voting ensures that, after voting, there is a truly reliable consensus.

For holders, supporting such infrastructure becomes clearer—it's not about flashy features, but about establishing a more transparent, auditable collaborative logic. Less screenshot battles, more verifiable records—that's what infrastructure should do.