42

Unconstitutional

It's not a bad idea, but I think the minimum Constitutional Committee size of 5 is too small. If we want to build resilience we should increase the total committee members to 9 and then make 7 minimum in case 2 are indisposed.

Data Not Verifiable. Additionally only a link is given about the details of an action, no information is given where appropriate, irrespective of content of the action we should not set president with this type of submission format.

We need to pass the budget for this year.

The governance action in question is about defining Cardano's vision and roadmap for 2025 and beyond, a critical step for the blockchain's future development. This roadmap outlines plans to improve scalability, expand Layer 2 solutions, and enhance developer experience, all of which are vital for Cardano's growth. Voting "Yes" supports these strategic initiatives, which could make Cardano more competitive and user-friendly. For example, enhancing scalability could mean faster transactions, benefiting everyday users. I do consider Leios, Hydra and Midgard as some of the top priorities.

Reducing Cardano's Treasury Tax from 20% to 10% might seem appealing in the short-term by slightly boosting staking rewards, but this benefit is minimal compared to the significant long-term risks. Such a cut would sharply decrease funding available for critical ecosystem growth, innovation, and infrastructure. Instead of a tax reduction, it's wiser to allocate treasury resources towards strategic priorities such as marketing to attract wider adoption, supporting high-quality dApp development, scaling initiatives, and advancing Cardano’s core blockchain technology—including important improvements planned for 2025 and beyond. Prioritizing efforts like these ensures lasting value for stakeholders, strengthens Cardano’s position, and secures sustainable growth rather than risking ecosystem stagnation for temporary gains.