P

Voting for on-chain transactions.

I am voting YES on the Cardano Summit proposal.

This is not a small amount of ADA, and I understand why many people are cautious about funding major events during poor market conditions. Treasury spending needs to be scrutinised carefully, especially when the ADA price is low, and every proposal is competing for a limited budget.

For me, this proposal is worth supporting because the Cardano Summit is not just a community meetup or a branding exercise. It is one of the few ecosystem-wide events that brings together builders, institutions, regulators, enterprises, governance participants, developers, DReps and community members in one place.

It matters because Cardano is now entering a different phase.

The ecosystem is no longer only trying to attract retail users, NFT traders or short-term speculation. A lot of the current opportunity centres on stablecoins, real-world assets, institutional adoption, enterprise integrations, regulatory conversations, developer onboarding, and long-term partnerships.

Those outcomes do not usually appear overnight. They often start with conversations, follow-up meetings, technical demos, workshops, hackathons and repeated exposure to the right people.

The interview with Laura Mattiucci from the Cardano Foundation and Nathaniel Acton from EMURGO helped clarify several important points for me. The Summit is being planned around ecosystem coordination, governance activities, Battle of the Builders, hackathons, workshops, enterprise and institutional discussions, regulatory panels, builder stages, and an expo area that gives Cardano projects a platform to be seen. They also explained that prior summits have led to ongoing relationships with organisations such as Petrobras, the European Commission, the German parliament, Draper University and other institutional conversations that are still developing.

I also think the timing matters.

Cardano has spent years building core infrastructure and is now seeing momentum across critical integrations, Bitcoin DeFi, stablecoin infrastructure, partner chains, governance tooling and DeFi applications. If we believe those efforts are worth funding, then we also need to support credible ways to put that work in front of people who can use it, integrate it, fund it, regulate it or build on it.

I do not expect the return from a Summit to be measured only in immediate on-chain metrics like TVL or wallets created. Some outcomes should be tracked through clear KPIs such as developer participation, hackathon submissions, project attendance, qualified leads, enterprise and government engagement, media reach, follow-up collaborations and public post-event reporting.

My support is based on the expectation that the Cardano Foundation continues to publish transparent reporting, milestone progress and measurable outcomes after the event.

The proposal is expensive, but I believe the cost is justified if it helps Cardano maintain visibility, coordinate the ecosystem, support builders and create the conditions for serious adoption conversations at a time when the ecosystem needs more than just technical development.

For those reasons, I am voting YES.

I am voting NO on the Token2049 title sponsorship top-up.

I support Cardano having a strong presence at Token2049. I am also voting YES on the base proposal because I believe Cardano should be visible in Singapore and represented properly in front of investors, institutions, builders, exchanges and enterprise decision makers.

However, I do not believe the additional title sponsorship top-up is necessary.

The base proposal already gives Cardano meaningful exposure and a credible presence at one of the most important crypto events in Asia. In my view, the extra spend required to move from that level of presence to title sponsorship does not provide enough additional impact to justify the cost to the treasury.

This is where we need to be disciplined.

The treasury should fund activities that create strong ecosystem value, but we should also look for savings where similar outcomes can be achieved with a lower spend. In this case, I believe Cardano can still be present, visible and taken seriously at Token2049 without paying the additional premium for title sponsorship.

The current market conditions also matter. ADA is low, the treasury is being asked to fund many competing priorities, and every extra allocation should clear a high bar. I do not think this top-up clears that bar.

This is not a vote against marketing, events or Cardano being seen globally. It is a vote for a more cost-effective version of the same strategy.

Support the base presence. Save the additional ADA. Use the treasury more carefully.

For those reasons, I am voting NO.

I am voting YES on the Token2049 base proposal.

This is still a significant treasury ask, so I do not take the vote lightly. In the current market, every ADA spent needs a clear reason, and event funding should be held to a high standard.

For me, the base Token2049 proposal is justified because it puts Cardano in front of the right audience at the right time.

Token2049 Singapore is one of the most important crypto and fintech events in the region. It attracts investors, exchanges, infrastructure providers, founders, institutions, funds, enterprise teams and decision makers who are actively looking at where the industry is going next.

Cardano needs to be visible in those rooms.

The ecosystem has spent years building core infrastructure. We are seeing momentum around stablecoins, Bitcoin DeFi, partner chains, real-world assets, governance, developer tooling and deeper integrations. If we want that work to turn into adoption, partnerships and liquidity, Cardano needs to show up where those conversations are already happening.

I also support the more practical approach of taking a strong but not excessive presence. The base proposal gives Cardano exposure, builder representation and a credible presence at the event without stretching the treasury ask further than necessary.

The success of this proposal should not only be judged by short-term on-chain metrics. A major industry event should be measured through qualified leads, builder participation, meetings, media reach, institutional conversations, follow-up partnerships and transparent post-event reporting.

My support is based on the expectation that the teams involved will publish clear outcomes after the event and show what was achieved with treasury funds.

For those reasons, I am voting YES.

Just abstaining

Been pressured to vote yes.

This is a conservative NCL, given the ADA price and the number of epochs it runs for. 100 epochs or 16.4 months. One part of me feels we are limiting the amount of money available for the ecosystem. I do feel like we need more but with the price, we have to remain diligent and responsible.

Guardrails are good. Having more members on the CC means more eyes are on Governance and the treasury, helping ensure they are safe.

On the other hand, we are creating more work for people in the ecosystem. Reducing the number can increase participation, but it also centralises control.

Because I'm for decentralisation and representation, I'll vote NO and keep the number at 7. Keep us in check and ensure we are operating within the bounds of the Constitution.

Voting yes on this one, although the price of ADA at the moment is well below where we thought it would be. Taking it and deploying now could be detrimental to the provisiong but the team knows this. There is more to the process than just deploying to protocols. Please use the funds wisely at this point in time.

Max van Rossem played a direct role in shaping Cardano’s governance, from the Constitution to the first elected Constitutional Committee. His work had lasting impact.

Naming Protocol Version 11 after him continues Cardano’s tradition of honouring those who helped build the system.

I support this proposal.

A Net Change Limit is required by the Constitution. Without it, treasury withdrawals cannot proceed.

This sets a cap, not a spend. Each withdrawal still requires its own vote and scrutiny.

The amount reflects realised inflows and prior DRep-approved budgets. The extended period improves governance continuity and can be adjusted later.

For these reasons, I vote YES.

I support this Budget Info Action.

Cardano needs a serious, low-latency order-book venue to support API traders, market makers, and tighter ADA and CNT pricing. AMMs alone do not cover this use case.

DeltaDeFi is already live on mainnet, built on Hydra, and led by a team with a strong track record in Cardano infrastructure and open-source delivery. This is not a greenfield experiment.

The scope is clear, limited to six months, and focused on hardening and scaling existing infrastructure. The inclusion of a KPI baseline, public dashboard, and final report adds accountability and makes ecosystem impact measurable.

As an Info Action, this is an appropriate signal to support Hydra-based trading infrastructure before considering any future Treasury withdrawal.

This version fixes the issues I had with earlier drafts.

Non-binding expectations and the Budget Info Action are removed. That keeps the Constitution focused on rules that can actually be enforced.

Proposal immutability is a solid step. Once submitted, documents cannot be changed. That protects trust.

Treasury audit and accountability rules now apply to all withdrawals. No gaps.

The EMURGO reversions are sensible. Broad DRep alignment matters for constitutional change.

Clearer. Tighter. Ready to move forward.

This Info action is a genuine attempt to give Cardano a shared long-term direction under full on-chain governance.

The process was community-led, well documented, and broad in reach. Builders, SPOs, founding entities, and users all had input. That gives this work legitimacy as a reference point, not a mandate.

As treasury decisions now sit with DReps, having a common strategic frame matters. Without it, funding choices risk drifting toward short-term signals and fragmented priorities.

This proposal does not bind votes or override the Constitution. It does not force alignment. It offers guidance. That is the right scope for an Info action.

The Vision, Strategy, and KPIs should remain living artefacts. They must be reviewed, tested against outcomes, and refined through future info actions.

Taken as a starting point, this is a constructive step toward more coherent and disciplined governance.

add her

This treasury withdrawal gives effect to the already-defined Cardano Critical Integrations Budget and, in my view, now includes enough governance safeguards and reporting commitments to justify moving ahead.

The strategic case remains strong: Cardano is missing core infrastructure that every serious DeFi and RWA ecosystem treats as basic utilities – tier-one stablecoin rails, institutional custody and wallets, analytics, bridges and a globally recognised oracle. Without these, TVL, liquidity depth and institutional participation will remain capped regardless of how good the base layer is. This withdrawal aligns funding directly with those gaps, and keeps scope tightly focused on integrations rather than vague ecosystem spend.

What has tipped the balance for me are the controls and guardrails around how the ₳70m can be used:

Constitutional and NCL alignment – The withdrawal is explicitly chained to the Critical Integrations Budget Info Action and the 2025 Net Change Limit extension. It can only be enacted if the budget info action passes, the extended NCL is in force and the Constitutional Committee is in confidence and at minimum size. That prevents funds moving without the broader governance picture in place.

Clear administrative accountability – Intersect is named as Administrator under Article IV, with Cardano Development Holdings holding the funds. There is a single, publicly viewable address delegated to Auto-Abstain, and no delegation to any SPO, which avoids governance distortion and staking yield on treasury funds.

Milestone-based disbursement – Funds do not simply move on approval. Drawdowns require signed statements of work, with milestone-based verification and an independent Oversight Committee checking that amounts, scope and recipients match the contracts. Upfront “milestone zero” payments are explicitly constrained to setup items like conversion fees, custody and legal onboarding.

Defined Steering Committee and conflict handling – A five-member Steering Committee (IOG, CF, EMURGO, Midnight Foundation, Intersect non-voting) holds executive decision power over allocations, with a 3/4 quorum for spend decisions and conflict of interest policies for both the Steering Committee and Oversight Committee.

High-level budget breakdown and capped admin – The withdrawal adds a concrete split (₳65m integrations, ₳3.5m legal/audit/compliance, ₳1.5m contingency) and caps administrative/legal/compliance overhead at a small share of the total, keeping most of the value directed at actual integrations.

Reporting and audits – Intersect commits to bi-annual public reports covering spend, remaining funds, milestone status, impact assessment and independent audit findings, as well as a final reconciliation and return of unused funds after 24 months.

While commercial confidentiality still limits vendor-level line items, the combination of constitutional pre-conditions, public custody, strong administrator accountability, milestone-gated disbursements and structured reporting provides a reasonable balance between practical negotiation constraints and the community’s need for oversight.

I am voting YES.
This action keeps treasury operations running without interruption by extending the current Net Change Limit for eight more epochs. The limit itself does not change and all past withdrawals still count toward the same cap. This protects the Treasury guardrails set in Article IV and avoids a situation where legitimate withdrawals cannot be enacted due to timing rules. It is a simple continuity measure that maintains orderly budgeting and prevents governance from stalling.

I am voting Yes on this action to add Cardano Curia to the Constitutional Committee.

The committee dropped below the minimum size after Cardano Atlantic Council stepped down. That means it cannot ratify any actions that need committee approval. Governance has been partly stalled since epoch 597. Adding the elected member lifts the committee back to the required size and restores full governance flow.

The snap election followed the same model used earlier in the year. The process was open, verifiable, and aligned with the Constitution and CIP-1694. The audited results are published, and the elected member will serve the remainder of the original term. Nothing else in the committee structure changes.

My vote supports keeping the governance system working as intended and avoiding gaps in decision making across the network.

This proposal finally tackles the big missing pieces that have held Cardano back – proper stablecoins, real oracles, solid custody and wallets, good analytics, and reliable bridges. Every major chain already has this stuff, and without it Cardano can’t grow the way it should. Getting these integrations in place will make it easier for new users, builders, and liquidity to actually come into the ecosystem, and that’s what we need right now.

The fact that the founding entities are putting in their own funds and covering any cost overruns is a huge bonus. It massively reduces the risk for the community and shows they’re serious about delivering.

That said, since this uses most of the remaining NCL, it still needs good transparency – rough budget breakdown, clearer KPIs than just “live”, and some clarity on how underperformance will be handled.

With that in place, this is the right move at the right time.

Let's get this done. More T1 exchanges that support CNTs the better.

Had a good chat with Chris Gianelloni from Blink Labs about the tech and its impact. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKXSGNxO7SQ

Since this isn't and won't be a treasury withdrawal, I say yes to this proposal.

It makes no sense to say no to this.

Yes, get this done. It should have been done ages ago. This person has been very patient.

No, I thought we were all working for free? Will update the vote upon review if needed.

Yes, the community sentiment is good for this one. I support the work that has gone into improving things. Thanks Yuta for all the information you've gathered on this one.

Supporting the platform that most users will be using to read and vote on proposals.

All of my video tutorials reference the website.

• I represent my delegates, and the majority of them want me to vote yes; many have left and delegated directly to Goofy.
• I believe the proposal is good and they can deliver on the goals.
• I don't want to deal with community backlash, voting to abstain or not.

This is the info action side of things, and I'll vote it through to get it to the next stage of treasury withdrawal.

I have full confidence in the team. I am a part of it too, but in the next phase I'd be abstaining from the vote as its a clear conflict of interest voting for a proposal that I am a part of for funding the business development and growth here in Oceania.

OpShin reduces the barrier to Cardano smart contracts by using Python. The maintainer is known. The tool is live and in use. The request is modest and covered by the approved 2025 budget. Funds keep the toolchain current with Plutus changes and standards. This backs core developer needs and ecosystem growth.

This funding aligns with the approved Cardano Budget 2025 item for Intersect. It supports critical governance, infrastructure stewardship, and ecosystem coordination during the Voltaire transition. Intersect’s role as Administrator, core code steward, and committee facilitator is vital for maintaining stability, ensuring safe upgrades, and enabling informed participation. Oversight mechanisms and smart contract-based treasury management provide transparency and accountability.

This proposal continues funding for AdaStat.net, a proven and widely used Cardano blockchain explorer. The project delivers decentralised, open-source, high-performance infrastructure that benefits SPOs, DReps, developers, and everyday users. It has a strong track record of consistent updates since 2019, offers free API access, and aligns with the approved Cardano Budget 2025 plan. Funding ensures long-term sustainability, improved features, and supports ecosystem transparency.

This proposal is part of the approved 2025 Cardano budget and funds critical infrastructure that directly supports developers, SPOs, and users. Cexplorer.io is a proven, high-traffic platform with established reliability and a clear plan for maintenance and feature expansion. The funding aligns with the constitutional requirements for transparency, delivery assurance, and community benefit, ensuring continued availability of an essential Cardano tool.

This proposal aligns with the approved Cardano Budget 2025. Scalus will improve developer productivity, reduce onboarding friction, and expand the pool of potential Cardano developers by leveraging Scala 3. The vendor has a strong technical background, and the delivery process includes contractual oversight and milestone-based assurance.

This proposal supports continued maintenance of Eternl, a long-standing, widely used Cardano wallet across multiple platforms. The service is essential infrastructure for both users and developers. Funding sustains its reliability and security, aligning with the approved Cardano 2025 budget.

This proposal directly addresses a critical gap in Cardano's interoperability by delivering a zero-knowledge bridge with open-source smart contracts, protocol documentation, and a proof-of-concept deployment. It enables secure, trust-minimised asset and message transfers with other blockchains, removing reliance on centralised validators. The vendor has proven cryptographic and Aiken smart contract expertise, and the project is part of the approved 2025 Cardano budget. Funding aligns with ecosystem priorities for cross-chain connectivity and future zkRollup capabilities.

This proposal delivers a suite of high-value core infrastructure projects already approved in the Cardano 2025 budget process. Tweag has a strong track record in Cardano core development and protocol research. The work directly supports scalability, performance, and verifiability goals, with clear alignment to the ecosystem's technical priorities. Given its prior approval and strategic importance, funding should proceed.

Plutarch is a key production-grade tool for building Cardano smart contracts. Its upkeep and feature enhancements are necessary to maintain ecosystem stability and developer productivity. The team has a strong track record and the proposal aligns with the approved Cardano Budget 2025 allocations for core infrastructure maintenance.

Yes - This proposal is part of the approved Cardano Budget 2025, ensuring automatic support under my voting rules. A TypeScript-based light node running in the browser will improve accessibility, decentralisation, and developer onboarding. The project is managed under Intersect’s treasury and contract oversight framework, meeting constitutional requirements for transparency and delivery assurance.

BloxBean’s Java tools - CCL, Yaci, Yaci Store, and Yaci DevKit - are core to JVM developers on Cardano. Funding one developer for 12 months keeps these libraries current with network changes, fixes bugs, improves performance, and lifts documentation. The work is open source, used across the ecosystem, and covered under the approved 2025 budget. I vote YES because this strengthens developer tooling and lowers upgrade risk.

This is a budget-approved proposal under the 2025 Cardano budget process. It supports a structured, community-led process to define Cardano’s 2030 vision and 2026 roadmap, backed by product research and stakeholder engagement. Funding aligns with the goal of strengthening ecosystem planning and coordination.

This proposal matches the approved 2025 budget item High-yield RWA Asset for Cardano: Tokenized Real Estate. The vendor has a proven track record in blockchain and real estate tokenisation, with existing TVL and regulatory groundwork. Moving this protocol to Cardano aligns with the strategic goal of increasing real-world asset adoption. Treasury oversight and milestone-based payments are in place through Intersect’s smart contract framework and external assurance. No constitutional tenets are breached.

This proposal is already approved in the 2025 budget process and aligns with the marketing and ecosystem growth goals in my voting approach. It provides partial subsidies for projects to participate in exhibitions, lowering entry costs while requiring clear ROI-focused engagement before, during, and after events. The vendor has relevant experience and will operate under a milestone-based contract with independent oversight. The reduced funding request further minimises overlap with other community-funded marketing efforts.

This proposal has already been approved through the Cardano budget reconciliation process and forms part of the allocated ₳275M ecosystem budget. It addresses exchange access and liquidity gaps by funding a listing fee pool and market-making service for eligible Cardano native tokens. While outcomes will depend on project uptake and exchange agreements, the structure includes vendor oversight, milestone-based delivery, and third-party assurance. As the spend aligns with an approved budget allocation and follows the required constitutional processes, I support releasing the funds.

This proposal pilots quadratic funding with a reputation factor to broaden participation and match donations with treasury funds. The team has a strong record from past Catalyst work and relevant Identus expertise. Intersect’s process includes separate accounts, milestone reviews, and third-party oversight. The ₳1.5M request is part of the approved budget and has support from other DReps assessing similar withdrawals.

While the Cardano Builder DAO proposal has clear goals for boosting on-chain activity and supporting established dApps, the ₳12M request represents a large portion of available treasury funds. The scope is broad, and while oversight and reporting are included, the measurable return on investment for the wider ecosystem is not yet fully demonstrated. Given my conservative treasury approach, I support the concept but require more proven impact before backing a spend of this size. Abstaining avoids blocking the initiative while signalling a need for more concrete performance data before future large-scale funding.

This proposal funds a coordinated, Cardano-branded global events strategy to match the presence and influence of competing L1 chains. While outcomes are harder to measure, consistent visibility at high-profile conferences can drive developer interest, enterprise engagement, and broader ecosystem recognition. Competitors have successfully leveraged similar strategies to grow adoption and attract talent. The scale of funding is significant but proportionate to the strategic need to position Cardano as a leading blockchain in a competitive market.

While the proposal focuses on important governance evolution work, the ₳592,780 request is significant for research, reporting, and workshops without clear evidence of direct measurable gains to the broader ecosystem in the near term. The team is highly capable, and the work aligns with governance reform goals, but the scope and cost could be reduced or phased to validate value before committing this amount. No constitutional tenet is breached, yet given the high spend for exploratory outputs, I will abstain to avoid overcommitting treasury funds without demonstrated return.

This proposal supports a core developer infrastructure service with proven operational history since 2022, delivering 100% uptime and already serving key ecosystem projects like Eternl, NMKR, and Pool.pm. By funding NFTCDN to be free for all builders for 18 months, it removes significant cost and technical barriers to native asset adoption. The projected ROI of ~17x and estimated savings of 39,000 developer hours align with the Cardano Constitution’s goals of efficient treasury use and ecosystem growth. The spend represents a small fraction of the annual treasury budget and is tied to a milestone-based legal contract administered by Intersect with third-party oversight, ensuring accountability and delivery assurance. No constitutional tenets are breached, and the proposal clearly aligns with CIP-1694 requirements for transparency, oversight, and community benefit.

This proposal replaces the Interim Constitutional Committee with members elected through the recent, verified DRep election, as required by Article VII, Section 2 of the Cardano Constitution. The process followed a transparent, audited, and constitutional procedure, with term lengths allocated to ensure staggered continuity. Approving this action ensures governance continuity beyond the interim term’s expiry in epoch 580, without any breach of constitutional requirements or risk to treasury oversight. There are no missing disclosures or procedural concerns.

Large spend focused on one token with indirect ecosystem benefit. Oversight is mentioned but KPIs and budget detail are missing. Abstaining avoids blocking while signalling the need for clearer accountability and measurable outcomes before approving similar requests.

I support the Snek project and see its value in the Cardano community. I do not want to block its growth.
The request for ₳5M is a large spend with limited proven benefit to the wider ecosystem. There is no clear return on investment or detailed plan. The proposal also skips the required information governance action step.
Abstaining reflects my personal support for the project while signalling that the funding request is too high and lacks the process standards I expect.

I am voting YES. This update improves clarity and accessibility of the Constitution, removes outdated clauses, and simplifies processes without weakening decentralised checks and balances. Core safeguards - including DRep, SPO, and Constitutional Committee approvals - remain intact. While removing the Budget Info requirement reduces one procedural step for treasury withdrawals, overall transparency is maintained, and any issues can be addressed in future governance actions.

I voted NO on the proposal to set a 300 million ADA Net Change Limit (NCL) for Epochs 563–635 because it does not align with Cardano’s current treasury inflows and may hinder the ecosystem's growth.

Over the past 12 months, the Cardano treasury has received approximately 315 million ADA, averaging about 4.32 million ADA per epoch . Setting the NCL below this replenishment rate could restrict funding for essential projects, including long-term initiatives that span multiple epochs.

A more appropriate NCL would match or slightly exceed the annual inflow, ensuring that the treasury can support ongoing and future proposals without unnecessary constraints. This approach would provide flexibility and stability, fostering innovation and development within the Cardano ecosystem.

Plus, I've voted YES for the 350 NCL, which is set to pass and be enacted.

Therefore, I believe that the proposed 300 million ADA NCL is insufficient and recommend adjusting it to better reflect the treasury's capacity and the community's needs.

Sorry mate, the metadata is invalid. Try again after it all expires.

I voted Abstain on this proposal because, while I support the projects included, I don’t believe there’s a strong need to submit a separate Governance Action for proposals that were already included in the main Intersect-led budget.

At this early stage in Cardano’s on-chain governance journey, it's important to keep the process simple and clear. Having multiple Governance Actions for the same set of projects — even if they’re well-supported — adds unnecessary complexity and could confuse voters, without offering clear added value.

A single coordinated budget process, with transparent inclusion criteria and community signalling (like what Intersect facilitated), is the better path for now. This helps build trust, avoids fragmentation, and gives the ecosystem a cleaner, more unified way to manage treasury allocations.

Please reduce my workload, don't increase it.

I voted YES because the Amaru project makes Cardano stronger and more decentralised. Right now, we rely on just one main node (written in Haskell) to run the network. If something goes wrong with that, the whole system could be at risk. Amaru gives us a second, fully working option, built in Rust, a language known for safety, speed, and flexibility.

Having more than one node makes the network more secure and reliable. It also opens the door for new developers and use cases that are hard to do with the current setup. The team behind Amaru includes trusted names in the Cardano ecosystem, and they’ve planned carefully with clear goals, budget, and reporting.

The funding request is fair, ₳1.5 million for six months of work, and includes smart contract controls to make sure the money is used properly. This kind of proposal is exactly what Cardano’s treasury should support if we want a stronger, more resilient ecosystem in the long term.

I voted YES because this proposal presents a well-structured approach to coordinating and funding key projects that support the Cardano ecosystem. We need this development and support of key Cardano projects within the ecosystem. It brings together 39 initiatives focused on development, governance, marketing, infrastructure, and innovation, all aligning with Cardano’s 2025 roadmap.

This is not a direct request for funds but a signal to recognise the combined budget so that future Treasury Withdrawals for each project can be submitted and approved individually. That ensures proper review and accountability for each step.

As the proposed administrator, Intersect will utilise smart contracts and multisig wallets whenever possible to manage the release of funds. There are built-in checks like due diligence, milestone tracking, and the ability to pause payments if terms aren’t met. All of this helps ensure the responsible use of treasury funds.

I understand there are concerns regarding grouping so many project budget requests into one single Governance Action, but at this point in the Governance journey, I don't believe we will be able to constantly call upon DRep's time and energy to analyse proposals over and over again.

Approving this proposal shows that Cardano is ready to move forward with on-chain budgeting in a transparent and decentralised way. It’s an important step in making governance real and in funding the work needed to keep the ecosystem growing and evolving.

Now that we have moved into the era of on-chain governance and the Cardano blockchain is in the hands of the community, it's time to move forward with the constitution. I vote yes to removing the interim constitution and replacing it with the latest Cardano Constitution detailed in the Governance Action.

Some are unhappy with how it works and its details, but there is room for improvements, amendments and growth for the ecosystem and ADA holders.

Let's take the next step forward.

Regards
PB