Having been involved in the crypto space for over ten years, I have seen many DAO projects go from popularity to silence. I still remember the early major hacking incident, and later watched how projects like certain DEXs and DeFi protocols survived through mature governance systems. I have also participated in token voting and gradually realized a truth: how far a protocol can go depends not just on technology, but on governance design, which truly determines life or death.

Recently, what made me revisit this question is Falcon Finance. What’s interesting about this project is not just the liquidity infrastructure itself, but that through the $FF governance token, the community directly holds the key decision-making power of the protocol. As a user observing for some time, I wanted to understand whether its governance is truly implemented.

The project’s operation process is actually not complicated: users stake crypto assets or RWA to generate USDf, then stake to earn yields, and can also participate in restaking. In this logic, the role of $FF is very clear — holders can initiate proposals and vote on how incentives are allocated, which new assets to support, and how to expand the ecosystem.

Compared to the governance token of a certain DEX, $FF is clearly more practical. It’s not just a voting tool; holding and staking can earn dividends, giving the token real economic value. Moreover, its circulating supply is limited, with no large-scale unlock planned before 2026, naturally reducing selling pressure. Looking at community discussions and proposal content, activity levels are quite high, with people discussing substantive issues like RWA strategies and budget allocation, creating a pragmatic atmosphere. The scale of USDf is also steadily growing, indicating that the ecosystem is indeed attracting real users.