The eyes of the masses are clear, but if there is not enough guidance and restraint, this kind of "smart" may become a kind of paranoia and a kind of arrogance without direction. It is based on the "majority" over the "minority" The institutional arrangements on the board are likely to go into one-sided and narrow traps. For "superior" evaluation, officials face "one person" and "public" comments, and officials face "a group of people". The pressure of "sky" and the responsibility of "stand up" can complement each other to truly play a sufficient role in supervision. The organic combination of top-down and bottom-up supervision forces can avoid the one-sidedness of "one person" in the game. One-sided with "a group of people". What's the point of this text? ['Questioning the rationality of mass comment.', 'The will of the masses must be reasonably guided and restrained.', 'How to effectively monitor officials.', 'How to achieve a balance between the masses and superiors.']