Ratio_St8tik_St8tikRatio

The Cardano Constitution should not be viewed as a best "effort," a final document or even a minimal viable product (MVP). It is a start to what many believe will provide a more "democratic" society within Cardano. A fair, just, balanced, equality driven ecosystem of the future for the people, by the people.

My views differ. The Constitution is an incomplete document. There is no definition set that is integrated into the Constitution. Instead, the definitions that were labored over for many hours, during many days, encompassing the thoughts of many people; they are merely suggestive, unenforceable words added separately.

Simple words like "community" has been shown to mean something altogether different than its common usage and certainly in context outside of block-chain norms. Other phrases including words such as unreasonable(y) are intentionally ambiguous; this may be so fees are not parameterized in an unknown future, or it could provide that leeway when applied towards enforcing actions against bad actors, or otherwise unconstitutional, immoral and even unethical actions. Presumable that ambiguity is to allow for translation discrepancies within an international community.

Amendment thresholds are too high. Again, this can be positive or negative. It truly depends on whose agenda it is, who submitted the proposal and which plutocrats are for or against. On the more negative side, the broader community does not have this capacity without the assistance of the founding entities or those entities and organizations located within Intersect MBO.

With the millions of dollars Intersect paid to host regional and international workshops, through the final signing of the Constitution, the participation rate was low, continues to be low and, to be honest, has always been low. Ratifying a Constitution for a block-chain community, if anything, should have spurred more participation. Low participation is a by-product of the misuse of the tools the founding entities have at their disposal. This was the case with Project Catalyst in 2021/2022. Communication and outreach is not a priority unless there is an agenda to push, persons to persuade and influencers to hype up. Throughout the entire process Intersect controlled many aspects; pushed, directed, funneled all talking points, agendas and goals for meetings through Constitutional delegates.

The governance platform has errors, doesn't match up or recognize other platform metadata and fails to build UTXOs appropriately. All leading to overspending in transactions, headaches, and more questions. The gov.tools road-map is lacking and with the current build lacks any form of visible voting history. Intersect is the overlord of Cardano, why would they rush a constitution and governance?

This constitution is not beneficial to the community. There is possible harm that can be caused by actions taken after a ratification. Harm to users, to ada holders, to developers, to those that make the ecosystem what it is; not the founders or MBOs who hope to gain more, or retain, power of this block-chain. This is a request to ratify a document that creates more questions than there are WILLING people to answer; at least not until the ratification.

Regardless if others agree with the above sentiment is moot. This vote takes into account the ENTIRE community, the silenced community, the ignored community; nothing in this document benefits the every-person. It continues the processes we are currently accustom to, adds a little bit of, possibly, transparency and continues extracting time, knowledge and life from all of those who participate. The difference; you are voting for it to continue.

This was not a document created by the sheer will of the broader community. It is a document that has been manipulated to a point of exhaustion. Debates no longer mattered. Discourse was fading. Concerns discounted. All because of biases brought into a community initiative and perverted to resemble one organizations agenda, desires, and goals. There are very few principles mentioned in the document. Those principles of governance being education, honesty, inclusivity, transparency, accountability, self-sovereignty, equality and decentralization; mostly missing.

A constitution with no principles does not belong in any community, collective, county, country or continent. It is with regret to those principled people whom participated in bringing this document to the community that I MUST VOTE NO.