TNT

Hoping that someone will discover that Cardano is a very insecure network without a native oracle as well-designed as Orcfax

I vote no because I consider a 5% return over 12 months insufficient. I would vote yes with a 5% return until the financing is fully repaid to the treasury. I would support this proposal as presented.

I vote Yes. I'm eager to be able to use DeFi from my Daedalus node.

My vote is Yes. I take this opportunity to protest the votes of Yoroi Wallet and Emurgo because they haven't explained the existing conditions of uncertainty that led them to vote No. I remind them of the enormous responsibility they bear given the number of votes they represent. I believe this proposal has great commercial potential, and they have a business on the mainnet. I support this project.

There is no audit of the infrastructure

Not a single cent of the budget has been allocated to DAO builders, including Cardano's native oracle Orcfax, while huge amounts are paid for integrations of non-native oracles that do not publish on-chain and sign with a single server.

I vote yes because of the core principles of the proposal and because I firmly believe in IOHK's management. However, I urge IOHK to submit future funding applications with the same transparency we demand of others.

I vote yes despite it being a mere band-aid. The real solution is to compensate committee members and DReps who vote, or at least make voting free.

Due to the shortage of funds and the large number of proposals, such broad proposals should be broken down into smaller packages with 12 months of funding.

I support the budget proposed by IOG for the development of PENTAD 2 and consider strengthening DeFi infrastructure and Cardano’s technical capabilities to be strategically important for the ecosystem. However, I would like to add a critical reflection regarding the direction part of the data and oracle infrastructure is taking.

I do not believe it is constructive to allocate resources toward integrating critical dependencies on external oracle providers such as Pyth while, at the same time, native Cardano oracle projects like Orcfax are left abandoned or without sufficient support. A blockchain aspiring to technological sovereignty and long-term resilience should not depend exclusively on external infrastructure for critical parts of its DeFi stack.

The recent history of the ecosystem should serve as a warning. Cardano relied for a period on the NOMAD bridge as one of the main arteries for bringing USDT and USDC liquidity into Cardano DeFi. After years of apparently functioning normally, it took only a few days after becoming truly systemic infrastructure within the ecosystem for the well-known multimillion-dollar hack to occur, severely damaging confidence and security around that infrastructure.

Beyond the specific responsibilities of that incident, the strategic lesson is clear: depending on external components for critical infrastructure introduces risks that Cardano does not fully control.

For this reason, I believe Cardano should prioritize supporting at least one truly native, decentralized, and economically sustainable oracle within its own ecosystem. The existence of native alternatives does not mean rejecting external integrations such as Pyth, but rather avoiding excessive dependency and providing Cardano DeFi with redundancy, technological sovereignty, and long-term strategic security.

I especially invite Charles Hoskinson and ecosystem entities to reflect on the importance of preserving fundamental native capabilities within Cardano, particularly in areas as sensitive as oracle infrastructure.

Eternl forever!

I would support a more focused proposal:

smart contract development,
L1 node capabilities (Pillars 1 and 3),

Funding in smaller and verifiable stages.

https://ipfs.blockfrost.dev/ipfs/QmSW8mbUcL1FCPuiv1pMtmoVqTJDVyqjfVWZzevE7c5SXi (Cardano Fundation)

I would support the part of this proposal for 1 year, and in 1 year I would support the other part.

If Cardano wants to fulfill its 2030 narrative, Leios is not optional

I want to be able to pay my fees with anything that has value.

I vote in favor of this proposal because it addresses a structural bottleneck in the ecosystem documented with quantitative evidence: the stagnation around 550 active developers

It's an optimal proposal at a really tough moment. That said, this year's Cardano Summit should be the most interesting one yet, with DeFi applications incubating and Bitcoin starting to make its presence felt, and TOKEN2049 is packed with external audience.

I vote in favor of this proposal.

TypeScript is one of the most widely used programming languages worldwide, and lowering the barrier to entry for this developer base constitutes an important lever for ecosystem growth. In particular, Pebble builds a bridge for Web2 and EVM developers, while Gerolamo expands infrastructure accessibility through lightweight node implementations, including browser-based use cases.

Taken as a whole, this proposal strengthens the infrastructure, the developer experience, and the accessibility of the ecosystem in a coherent and well-aligned way.

If IOG proposes it and the Cardano Foundation accepts, they will have a good reason

Node diversity is not optional; it is a necessary condition to achieve a robust security standard. The addition of Dingo as a Go-based node brings Cardano closer to the multi-client model that has already proven essential in other ecosystems.

Furthermore, this proposal offers a clear differentiating value: Go is one of the most widely used languages in blockchain infrastructure. Opening Cardano’s core to this ecosystem of millions of developers lowers barriers to entry, facilitates external audits, and accelerates enterprise adoption. The control structure is also solid: milestone-based disbursements and independent oversight with the ability to pause funding provide real guarantees for the treasury.

From a security perspective, node diversity is critical. With multiple independent implementations, the network can detect and reject errors before they become irreversible. Each additional node significantly reduces this risk.

Overall, this proposal is not simply funding development, but a structural investment in the security, decentralization, and accessibility of the Cardano ecosystem.

For all these reasons, I vote YES.

Voting Rationale: YES

The Intersect Budget Process Framework represents a substantial improvement over the previous year and deserves a positive vote for three main reasons.

A more mature and structured process

The framework introduces real standardization: unified templates that allow proposals to be compared with one another, mandatory alignment with Cardano’s Vision 2030 and ecosystem KPIs, and the organization of deliverables into Work Packages with clearly defined dependencies. This transforms proposal submission into a predictable process for both proposers and DReps. Quality filters (a minimum threshold of 100,000 ADA and a submission fee of 1,000 ADA) reduce noise without excluding legitimate proposals.

Real accountability, not promises

Milestone-based payments through smart contracts ensure that funds are released based on verifiable deliverables, not intentions. The combination of transparent on-chain disbursements, multi-party controls, and milestone tracking is precisely what responsible treasury management requires. The critical infrastructure the ecosystem needs (institutional stablecoins, custody, cross-chain bridges) deserves to be funded strategically, and this framework makes that possible.

Treasury Donation consideration

The 1,000 ADA Treasury Donation could be allocated to compensate DReps and Constitutional Committee members who bear the real burden of evaluating each proposal.

VOTE YES

Cardano has spent years building with rigor, with patience, with a long-term vision that few ecosystems can match. Today, we are presented with an opportunity we cannot afford to miss. And it is not just an opportunity, it is a necessity.

For the first time, the Treasury stops being a grant machine and becomes an investment vehicle with returns. This is the most sustainable model for the long-term health of ADA holders, and it is exactly the kind of evolution a mature ecosystem needs.

We are introducing an internal venture capital function within Cardano itself, growth financed with our own resources, reducing dependence on external capital. And we are doing so with a design that aligns incentives flawlessly: most of the capital goes directly into the ecosystem, the Treasury is repaid first, and the GP only earns profits afterward. That structure is not a minor detail, it is the core of the proposal, and what makes it fair.

Real control, not promises.

Skeptics ask, who oversees this? The answer lies in the design. The tranche structure is not just a control mechanism, it is a system of real milestones. Each capital release requires returning to the community, reporting, proving execution. DReps retain veto power at every tranche. If performance is not adequate, if execution deviates from ecosystem values, everything can be stopped. That is not blind faith, it is active governance.

And this is not a vague promise: there will be a dashboard, periodic reports, and verifiable return flows. There is a clearly defined operational framework, the use of funds is precisely broken down, and reimbursement scenarios are considered if the fund does not become operational. This proposal also sets a clear precedent on how to structure Treasury withdrawals for professionally managed funds, something Cardano urgently needed.

Cardano’s problem is not technical, it is commercial.

We have the technology. The eUTXO model is robust, secure, and especially suited for emerging trends such as AI applications and autonomous systems. Cardano is well positioned for regulated financial infrastructure, compliance-first from day one. And yet, we remain far behind competing ecosystems commercially.

Why? Because the problem is commercial, not technical. We lack connections, we lack network, we lack presence in the rooms where institutional capital moves. That is exactly what Draper Dragon can provide immediately, capabilities that would take years to build internally: networks with global exchanges, developers. Not to mention concrete programs such as Hacker House and the Growth Accelerator, designed to grow real projects within the ecosystem.

Filling the gap no one has filled.

Catalyst is postponed and its future is uncertain. Builder DAO will not generate the kind of results the ecosystem needs right now. There is a critical funding gap.

This proposal addresses it directly. It helps retain talent that is currently leaving for better-funded ecosystems. And it does so with a concrete allocation of capital across investment, listings, and acceleration that makes strong strategic sense.

Draper Dragon, its track record speaks for itself: blockchain investments that have defined the sector, a global network of contacts.

DReps should be evaluating and making high-level strategic decisions. Voting for this proposal is exercising that role correctly.

A signal to the world.

Approving this proposal is not just a financial decision. It is a message. It is Cardano telling the market: we are ready to compete at an institutional level. We are capable of combining decentralized governance with professional capital without sacrificing either. That has incalculable reputational value.

The proposal has also undergone thorough constitutional validation. This is not a rushed proposal. It is legally well constructed, without obvious gaps that would allow misuse of funds.

There is no time for perfectionism.

We already know the cost of regret. There is a moment for every opportunity, and funds like this do not come twice. Cardano is at a critical point: it needs real products, real adoption, and the institutional leap that this proposal can catalyze. The cost of falling behind commercially is enormous.

The first tranche is the minimum viable step to prove the model before scaling. It is small enough to be prudent, large enough to be meaningful. And every future decision will be based on real execution evidence, not promises.

I vote YES. As a first step in a process of continuous improvement. As a commitment to a Cardano that not only builds well, but also competes, grows, and wins.

The moment is now. The vote is yes.