CARDANO BLOCKCHAIN ECOSYSTEM CONSTITUTION v2.3
207 DReps voted · 77 with a rationale · 9 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes442.9K ₳No rationale
- No414.2K ₳No rationale
- Abstain409.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes383K ₳No rationale
- Yes381.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes365.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes320.4K ₳Rationale
Panda votes YES since the revision eliminated Panda concerns about the previous v2.0
However, not sure about keeping "ada" lower case vs "Ada"
- YesRevoted316.8K ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes8mo agoSuperseded
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
- Yes314.4K ₳Rationale
I'm voting yes in this governance proposal!
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I am comfortable supporting this version of the Constitution because my most important concerns in version 2 — specifically the identity and location disclosure — have been addressed.
It is also positive that there is now a provision for auditing not only treasury withdrawals above 1,000,000 ada but for all Treasury Withdrawals actions, with independent auditors and annual reporting to the community.
Additionally, I value the overall editorial improvements: clearer wording, standardized terminology, and grammar/punctuation fixes, as well as the consolidation of role-disclosure into a general rule (removing duplication from the SPO section).
I recognize there is no "perfect" constitution; this is an iterative process, unlike national constitutions that are often set in stone. I also accept that no constitution will match my preferences 100%. A very good, sufficiently robust version is enough — and this version meets that requirement. Therefore, I am voting yes!
- Yes300.6K ₳No rationale
- No298.9K ₳Rationale
Concerns
- The term "Ada user" was chosen in Argentina because it was intended to include those who had not taken custody of their own keys.
- "For as long as they wish, while honoring their freedom to take another path." ... This sounds lame.
- We don't need definitions; some ambiguity is acceptable.
- This is a significant rewrite of the constitution, and it has not undergone sufficient community exposure or review.
- It is not clear that we should remove the budget info action mechanism.
- We should not approve large changes to the constitution in a single action; each individual change should be proposed as its own revision.
Conclusion
For the reasons listed above, I am voting against this constitutional revision.
A lot of effort went into reaching the constitution as it exists today. If you want to propose minor individual changes, I will be much more open to them than I am to the large revisions you have submitted thus far.
- Yes294.4K ₳No rationale
- Yes270.1K ₳Rationale
I vote YES on the proposal to adopt the Cardano Blockchain Ecosystem Constitution v2.3 based on the following key reasons.
Clearer and Stronger Governance Framework
Version 2.3 builds upon the foundation established in 2.0 with important clarifications and enhancements. It removes non-binding aspirational clauses and the Budget Info Action mechanism, streamlining governance into enforceable, operational rules focused on Treasury Withdrawals and oversight. This rationalization strengthens constitutional coherence and legal certainty, improving accountability for treasury fund administration.
Enhanced Transparency and Oversight
The update mandates immutability of hosted proposal documents, expanded definitions for key governance terms, and universal application of audit and administrator designation requirements on all treasury withdrawals. This elevates transparency and consistency in how funds are governed and overseen, directly responding to community feedback and governance experience since version 2.0.
Alignment with Cardano’s Strategic Direction
By simplifying processes and codifying rigorous oversight mechanisms, version 2.3 better supports Cardano’s decentralized ethos while facilitating scalability and operational efficiency. It strengthens key guardrails such as the Net Change Limit and clarifies stakeholder roles, which are essential foundations for sustainable ecosystem growth and community trust.
Incorporation of Community Feedback
The refined provisions reflect recommendations aimed at removing ambiguity, improving enforceability, and ensuring strong oversight—addressing gaps noted in earlier versions. This collective community input has been prudently integrated to balance transparency, inclusivity, and practical governance.
Summary
The Constitution v2.3 delivers a streamlined, principled, and robust governance framework that clarifies accountability, enforces rigorous treasury fund oversight, and removes outdated provisions. It upholds Cardano’s commitment to decentralized, transparent, and resilient governance. Given these substantial improvements and thoughtful incorporation of feedback, endorsing v2.3 is a prudent step forward for the Cardano community’s collective governance maturity.
I therefore strongly support a YES vote on the Cardano Blockchain Ecosystem Constitution v2.3 proposal.
- Yes260.2K ₳Rationale
The document becomes cleaner, more coherent, and legally solid. Treasury accountability is strengthened, and governance simplified.
Community values can live in off-chain charters, not in the Constitution.
- Yes252.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes238.8K ₳Rationale
Voting yes understanding that v2.3 turns treasury requests from a two-step, process into a single vote. Vote less. Trust more. Govern better.
- Yes232.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes228.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes199K ₳Rationale
It is an acceptable update but what missing is the adoption of upper limiting drep powers. With that decisions would be more versatile and only a handful of dreps mostly like wallet owners yoroi and eternl would not hove majority just on their own already.
- Yes191.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes182.2K ₳No rationale
- No147.5K ₳No rationale
- Yes138.4K ₳No rationale
- Yes131.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes110.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes109.5K ₳Rationale
I approve the proposed changes to the Cardano Constitution because they meaningfully simplify governance, improve consistency, and strengthen accountability.
Simplified Governance:
The removal of aspirational “Expectations” and “Encouragement” clauses makes the Constitution leaner and more enforceable. It removes redundant mechanisms like the Budget Info Action, reducing bureaucratic overhead and potential confusion.Clarity and Consistency:
The introduction of unified terminology (e.g., “Ada Holders”, “Treasury Withdrawals”) and new definitions ensures precision and interpretive consistency, which seems critical to me.Enhanced Accountability:
By requiring that all proposal documents are immutable and by extending treasury audit safeguards to all withdrawals (not just large ones), the proposal enforces greater transparency and protection of treasury funds.Operational Focus:
By shifting procedural details (like codes of conduct) out of the Constitution and leaving them to community practice, the document maintains constitutional clarity without overregulating implementation details.In summary:
These changes make Cardano’s governance framework more transparent and user-friendly while removing unnecessary complexity. I believe approving v2.3 strengthens the ecosystem’s ability to evolve sustainably. Furthermore, Version 2.3 incorporates widespread feedback from reviews, indicating an effective iterative governance process. - Yes108.3K ₳Rationale
The changes to the constitution being made by this proposal are well thought through and there has been extensive community input. The result I believe is a better, more concise document. The most important change is the removal of the info action requirement for budget withdrawals. I believe this to be a good change to try and make the governance process less onerous on both DReps and proposers. It's important to note that some of the requirements that were part of the info action process still exist but are now part of the withdrawal request process. This should maintain the safety of the system while improving its agility. I find the changes here to be positive and therefore I am voting in favor of this proposal. Thank you to everyone who has put in extensive effort into this action.
- Yes107.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes105.8K ₳No rationale
- Abstain65.7K ₳Rationale
Nothing against it. Nothing for it.
- Yes58.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes55.9K ₳Rationale
already approved the previous one. I commend Yutas persistence and willingness to listen to feedback and submit another update.
- Yes48.6K ₳Rationale
it helps to grow
- Yes46.5K ₳Rationale
yes, this version is showing the continuous effort of Yuta and the team
they listen to feedback from the community and help shaping the goverannce for the nearest future - Yes45.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes40.4K ₳No rationale
- Yes29.3K ₳No rationale
- No26.7K ₳Rationale
Nothing makes sense
- Yes25.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes15.7K ₳No rationale
- No15.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes12K ₳No rationale
- Yes10.6K ₳Rationale
I like this proposal, so I vote yes.
- No8.3K ₳No rationale
- Abstain8.1K ₳No rationale
- NoRevoted6.7K ₳History
Earlier votes
No9mo agoSuperseded
No9mo agoSuperseded
- Yes5.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1K ₳No rationale
- NoRevoted1.7K ₳History
Earlier votes
No8mo agoSuperseded
- Yes1.2K ₳Rationale
I vote YES for Cardano Blockchain Ecosystem Constitution v2.3. This update is exactly the kind of practical, thoughtful refinement our governance needs. It streamlines processes, removes non-binding clutter, and reinforces accountability for all treasury withdrawals — principles that are central to sustainable, community-led governance. I appreciate the clarity and consistency brought by unified terminology, clear definitions, and immutable proposal documents. These changes protect the integrity of the process and prevent ambiguity or manipulation. Most importantly, v2.3 builds on community feedback from v2.0, showing that the Constitution evolves responsibly while maintaining decentralization, transparency, and legitimacy. This is a solid, sensible update that strengthens Cardano’s governance framework without overcomplicating it. This aligns perfectly with my values: supporting clear rules, strong oversight, and a decentralized, community-driven ecosystem.