Having multiple independent parties all pushing toward the same goal—even when they disagree on the details—is actually something any DAO or organization should consider a win. It shows genuine passion and real stakeholder engagement.

Sometimes people point to governance disagreements (like what happened in certain protocols) and treat it as a failure. But that misses the point entirely. When you see intense debate within a community, you're not looking at weakness—you're looking at people who actually care enough to fight for what they believe in. That's the opposite of apathy.

The tricky part is navigation: staying aligned on the mission while allowing room for tactical disagreement. Not every DAO figures this out, but the ones that do? They tend to be stronger in the long run.