CARDANO BLOCKCHAIN ECOSYSTEM CONSTITUTION v2.3
207 DReps voted · 77 with a rationale · 9 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes17.4M ₳No rationale
- NoChanged17.3M ₳Rationale
CARDANO BLOCKCHAIN ECOSYSTEM CONSTITUTION v2.3
Earlier votes
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
- Yes16.7M ₳Rationale
Cardano Constitution v2.3 simplifies governance and strengthens accountability. It removes non-binding expectations and redundant mechanisms, such as the Budget Info Action, making the framework more efficient and enforceable. The update introduces immutable proposal documents and applies audit safeguards to all treasury withdrawals, improving transparency and fiscal responsibility. By refining definitions and standardizing terminology, it enhances clarity for all participants while integrating broad community feedback to ensure a more stable and legitimate governance foundation.
- Yes16.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes14.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes14.2M ₳No rationale
- No14.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes12.1M ₳No rationale
- Abstain12.1M ₳Rationale
We acknowledge the amount of work injected in the process to develop version 2.3 for this proposal. This is a clear indication that the author of the proposal believes in utilisation of constructive feedback and we applaud them as it is in line with our organisational principles. We have reviewed the latest version against the older versions and are impressed with the level of contextual upgrades.
It is clear that if a platform is created for community feedback, sensitive proposals like this would garner a lot of enriching context and input to solidify its position and as hinted in our previous vote, on top of the definition and clarifications, we are glad to see the essential parts of the “budget info governance action” being integrated into the “treasury withdrawal governance action” to make way for smooth removal of the budget info action step which easily leads to DRep voting fatigue, especially for individual DReps.
Despite the amazing upgrades to this version, all loopholes are not filled yet and for that matter we cannot vote yes. Notable amongst these critical loopholes are as follows:
a. The proposal author claims that the v2.3 incorporates feedback and improvements from v2.0 which received 86.23% community review from participating DReps but refuses to attach relevant supporting documentation. Albeit, we do acknowledge that there has been some level of input from DReps who voted on the previous version of the proposal but we believe that the input should not be from only DReps.
b. In our previous vote, we did recommend that the next version (this one) should explicitly include a clear, community-ratified constitution amendment process as a provision but was not effected yet.
c. While the constitution currently perceives all code of conducts as “expectations”, we believe instead of removing them, if there is the room to explore ways of having them enforceable by the constitution, we should explore. These are meant to serve as sewage for clean governance and should be strengthened instead of scrapping.
d. We note that the Cardano Civics Committee have set up a special interest group to determine an effective constitutional amendment process and we want to implore them to not act in haste but carefully accelerate the process to enable a well inclusive amendment process before 2026 budget process kicks in.
For these reasons, while we acknowledge the progress and commend the author’s diligence, unresolved issues of transparency, amendment clarity, and ethical safeguards prevent us from offering full endorsement at this time. Therefore, as Wada DRep, we vote abstain on this proposal with the expectation that these remaining gaps will be addressed in a future revision to achieve a more robust and complete constitution.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted10.8M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes8mo agoSuperseded
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes9.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes9.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes8.8M ₳Rationale
本提案に賛成します。Cardano憲法v2.3は、ガバナンスの基盤を明確にし、今後の意思決定をより透明で一貫した形で進めるための重要な更新だと考えます。\n\nI vote Yes on this proposal. The Cardano Constitution v2.3 strengthens the foundation of governance and provides clearer, more transparent guidance for future decision-making.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
Ralph Waldo Emerson:
"The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our past act or word" and "Why drag about this corpse of your memory?"
This is a better version than the existing constitution 1.0 and the proposed v 2.0 in my opinion. More precise, less typos and some important improvements, including immutable documents. More clarity about the term Net Change Limit is a big win. The unified terminology will be of help to the Constitutional Committee. The elimination of the Budget Info Action mechanism could simplify governance and help with DRep fatigue.
Finally, the biggest point of this proposal for me is to show that our constitutions are but snapshots in time of an ephemeral consensus -not a national constitution. They can and should be improved by the community without waiting for one of the big entities to spearhead the process. If this is a permissionless process and someone is proposing a clearly better, tighter, less ambiguous constitution, why would I vote No?
Let's move forward. If we can improve the constitution - let's be proud that we can do it and do it again.
This is a dynamic space. We might need to revisit the constitution many more times.
Evolution waits for no one.
- Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
I am in favor of this constitutional update to make improvements to how governance operates in Cardano. It simplifies process, adds clarity to some definitions, and attempts to firm up the immutability of what is done on-chain. While I would have liked to see some of this broken out, particularly changes to budget info action process, consensus based on feedback from many throughout the community suggests this will ultimately be a net positive and I agree. It's an iterative leap but one that's needed as over time I have growing concerns of governance participation waning due to process fatigue and confusion/interpretation efforts due to these improvements being needed.
- Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
Read through and the changes are reasonable and make sense. Thanks.
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
STORM Partners votes YES on the adoption of the Cardano Constitution v2.3.
This version continues the clean-up and refinement work started in v2.0, strengthening Cardano’s governance foundation with clearer definitions, consistent terminology, and immutability requirements for all governance docs. It also extends treasury accountability measures that were previously limited to large withdrawals, applying them universally to reinforce transparency and trust.The removal of non-binding “expectations” and the formal CC Code of Conduct requirement makes sense. These elements are better governed through community norms and social consensus rather than constitutional enforcement. What matters is that the Constitution remains concise, enforceable, and focused on verifiable obligations, and v2.3 delivers on that principle.
We see this as a continuation of Cardano’s shift toward a governance model that is more practical, accountable, and institutionally credible. It removes unnecessary friction while preserving integrity.
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Abstain4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳Rationale
I extend my sincere thanks to those responsible for updating the constitution. Each new version marks another step in the right direction. Thank you all for your dedicated efforts.
- Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- AbstainChanged4.1M ₳History
Earlier votes
No9mo agoSuperseded
- Yes4.1M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança (gov_action1ezp0r9rgf4njx93p9uq7l3kjs9m739jm0ntf26vplcmucec4jc0qqxjlfrc), pois ela reflete o desejo da comunidade em amadurecer os processos de governança, especialmente ao propor a remoção da “Info Action” para ações de saque orçamentário, além de tornar obrigatórios os requisitos administrativos e de auditoria para todos os saques do tesouro. Trata-se de uma medida que reforça a transparência, a responsabilidade e a integridade dos processos de gestão de recursos da rede, fortalecendo a confiança e a maturidade institucional do ecossistema.
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action (gov_action1ezp0r9rgf4njx93p9uq7l3kjs9m739jm0ntf26vplcmucec4jc0qqxjlfrc), because it reflects the community’s desire to advance the maturity of governance processes, particularly by proposing the removal of the “Info Action” for budget withdrawal actions, and by making administrative and auditing requirements mandatory for all treasury withdrawals. This measure strengthens transparency, accountability, and integrity in the networks resource management processes, reinforcing trust and institutional maturity within the ecosystem. - Yes4M ₳No rationale
- No3.8M ₳Rationale
Drep Vote: NO on Cardano Constitution 2.3
As a DRep, I have voted against the adoption of the Cardano Constitution 2.3 draft due to two major concerns and one minor, yet important, issue. I firmly believe ratifying this draft exposes the Cardano community to significant risks of treasury depletion and governance vulnerabilities.
- Removal of Budget Requirement Threatens Fiscal Discipline and Strategic Governance
The draft notably removes the constitutional expectation and mechanism for a coordinated, approved ecosystem budget. While I acknowledge budget processes are complex, abandoning a holistic budget undermines essential governance principles. Without a unified budgeting framework, governance devolves into a series of disconnected treasury withdrawals lacking necessary coordination or strategic priority. This absence eliminates effective constraints that force difficult yet critical decisions about technological direction and resource allocation.
A budget compels the ecosystem to make hard choices among competing priorities, fostering accountability, minimizing waste, and guarding against grift. Removing budget mandates risks chaotic financial management, ultimately accelerating treasury depletion and diminished community trust. The crucial safeguard disallowing treasury withdrawals outside an approved budget is eliminated, which is dangerous especially in periods of low DRep participation, voting fatigue, or potential treasury capture. Such structural laxity amplifies vulnerabilities that could jeopardize the ecosystem’s financial sustainability.
[Reference: Sections removed from original Constitution from line 211]- Insufficient Transparency and Justification for Changes Weakens Legitimacy
The existing Constitution was the product of extensive, transparent, and democratic processes involving hundreds of elected representatives participating in line-by-line deliberations across multiple continents. The institutional knowledge, rationale, and debate records provide a robust foundation and legitimacy for each provision.
In stark contrast, the 2.3 draft introduces numerous extensive changes without adequately documenting the reasons behind each modification. This opacity falls short of the rigor necessary to override prior collective wisdom and undermines the community’s trust in governance continuity. Any constitutional transformation must meet the highest standards of transparency and justification, which this draft regrettably fails to uphold.
- Narrowed Definition of Ada Holders Restricts Protections and Participation
The draft redefines “Ada Holders” as solely “persons,” potentially excluding organizations or entities that hold significant Ada stakes, including governments or institutions. While seemingly semantic, this change narrows the constitutional rights and protections within the ecosystem. It truncates the inclusiveness of governance protections and has cascading implications in several sections that dilute broader ecosystem rights guaranteed previously. This exclusion is misaligned with Cardano’s ethos of broad, community-wide participation and representation.
Conclusion
While stylistic improvements and minor clarifying amendments within the draft could offer some value, these are marginal compared to the profound risks and governance weaknesses introduced. The removal of the budget requirement, reduction of transparency on changes, and narrowing of protected stakeholders pose tangible, systemic threats to the Cardano community’s financial security, democratic integrity, and inclusiveness.
For these reasons, I cannot support ratification of the Cardano Constitution 2.3 draft in its current form.
- Yes3.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.7M ₳No rationale
- YesChanged3.1M ₳Rationale
Glad to see this proposal resubmitted with changes from feedback integrated. I sincerely hope this improvement to the Cardano Constitution passes. Thank you YUTA for your hard work in creating further clarity and simplification of the Cardano Constitution. Also, thank you to everyone who submitted constructive feedback. I appreciate the improvements made for the betterment of Cardano governance :)
Earlier votes
Abstain9mo agoSuperseded
As I have not yet had time to review this proposal, I have submitted a vote of Abstain for now.
- No3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
Cardano憲法v2.3では多くの整理が行われましたが、
特に重要な変更は次の3点です。
Budget Info Actionの廃止と全件監査の義務化
一部の大きな支出だけでなく、すべてのトレジャリー引き出しを監査対象とし、透明性を強化。
提案文書の不変性（immutability）の明文化
投票中に内容を変更できないよう固定化し、信頼性を保証。
非拘束的な期待・推奨条項の削除
助言的な条文を削除し、実効性あるルールだけを残して明確化。
v2.3は、「ルールを簡潔にし、誰もが同じ条件で、信頼できる形でガバナンスに参加できる」改訂です。
これら三つの合理的な変更を支持し、Yesで投票します。—
Cardano Constitution v2.3 introduces several refinements,
but the three most significant updates are:
Removal of the Budget Info Action and universal audit requirement
All treasury withdrawals, not just large ones, are now subject to equal auditing for greater transparency.
Codification of proposal immutability
Proposals can no longer be altered during voting, ensuring integrity and trust.
Deletion of non-binding expectation and encouragement clauses
Removed advisory language to keep only enforceable, practical rules.
v2.3 is a reform that simplifies the rules and enables everyone to participate in governance under equal and trustworthy conditions.
I support the rationality of these three changes and vote Yes. - Abstain2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
Glad to see the minor version updates. It is important we improve our constitution especially given how quickly we got it approved initially.
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- No2.1M ₳Rationale
Too many changes, unclear or ambiguous definitions and introduction of indeterminate legal terms (poor legal writing) as well as absolute unclear combined or unwanted side effects. As a very simple example among many other problem areas: The crucial difference that can exist between Ada Owners and Ada Holders is completely ignored (just think of trust relationships as a simple case).