Governance tokens are described as conferring a say over a protocol. Between holding a balance and changing anything sit several mechanisms, each of which shapes who actually decides.
Voting weight is captured at a snapshot
Counting votes from live balances would let someone borrow tokens, vote, and return them within a single transaction.
Governance systems therefore record balances at a block chosen when the proposal is created, and only holdings at that moment count.
Tokens bought afterwards carry no weight in that vote, which is why proposals specify their snapshot block prominently and why acquiring influence requires acting before a proposal appears.
Delegation is usually required
Many designs count only tokens that have been explicitly delegated, either to another address or to the holder's own.
Holders who never delegate have no voting weight at all, regardless of balance, and a large share of supply typically sits in that state.
The consequence is that effective control concentrates among active delegates, and a small proportion of supply can decide outcomes.
Thresholds gate what reaches a vote
Submitting a proposal usually requires holding or being delegated a minimum amount, which prevents the process being flooded with noise.
It also means smaller holders must find a large delegate willing to sponsor an idea before it can be considered formally.
Quorum requirements apply at the other end, so a proposal with majority support among voters fails if not enough weight participated.
Execution is separated by a delay
A passed proposal typically enters a timelock before the change takes effect, holding the queued action for a fixed period.
The delay exists so users can withdraw funds if they disagree with a decision, which is the only real protection available to those outvoted.
It also gives time to detect a governance attack, though stopping one usually requires a countervailing vote or an emergency power held by a smaller group.
Off-chain signalling does most of the work
Because on-chain votes cost gas, many protocols run non-binding polls using signed messages weighted by snapshot balances.
These cost nothing and attract wider participation, but they bind no one, and enacting the result still requires a formal on-chain vote or action by a multisignature group.
Reading a protocol's governance therefore means checking which decisions bind automatically and which depend on someone choosing to implement them, since the difference determines where authority actually lies.