Cardano Defi Liquidity Budget - Withdrawal 1

System4mo ago1 post

186 DReps voted · 71 with a rationale · 9 changed their vote

Open a row to read the rationale.

  • Yes196.1K ₳Rationale

    We need regulatory compliance and protective legal structures that work in the traditional world, and following the models proven by those who have gone before us is a shrewd approach. I'm happy with the proper governance infrastructure of this proposed committee, executive, supervisor approach. Ultimately the DAO vote will determine the spending of funds, meeting the primary objective.
    I'd prefer participants in these legal structures to have proven stake in the success of Cardano, but hopefully these will emerge with time.

    I trust the teams involved in the smart contract portions of the plan and am pleased to see external audit budgets considered.

    The overall costs seem high, but that should hopefully cater for the volatility of our asset and ensure delivery and/or refunds.

  • Yes191.1K ₳No rationale
  • Yes182.2K ₳No rationale
  • Yes178.9K ₳No rationale
  • No171.1K ₳No rationale
  • Yes142.5K ₳No rationale
  • Yes138.4K ₳No rationale
  • Yes137.4K ₳No rationale
  • Yes115.6K ₳No rationale
  • No112.1K ₳No rationale
  • Yes110.9K ₳No rationale
  • Abstain109.5K ₳No rationale
  • Yes108.3K ₳Rationale

    I am in favor of this treasury withdrawal request. I have already voted in favor of the budget info action and gave my rationale for that on the info action vote metadata. This action is about ensuring that the team is handling the funds in a responsible way, and I believe that they are. I am satisfied with the proposed process that this well known and respected team is putting forward to handle the funds. There is some risk involved but I am also satisfied that the plan proposed mitigates the risk as much as is reasonable to expect.

  • Yes55.9K ₳Rationale

    first withdrawal: yes. LOADS of good effort in here for valuable things.
    second withdrawal: lets see. I think i even prefer three withdrawals.. slow ramp up.

  • Yes50.5K ₳No rationale
  • Yes49.6K ₳Rationale

    I vote Yes to pass the Defi Liquidity Budget

  • Yes48.6K ₳Rationale

    cool

  • Abstain46.5K ₳Rationale

    a slight abstain without clear information updates from previous year defi liquidity progress

  • Abstain45.2K ₳No rationale
  • Yes30.9K ₳No rationale
  • No29.3K ₳No rationale
  • Abstain28.2K ₳Rationale

    I actually like the direction here. Trying to bring more liquidity into Cardano DeFi makes sense, and I appreciate that this proposal is focused on setting up the foundation first instead of rushing to deploy a huge amount of ADA.

    That said, I’m not fully comfortable voting YES yet.

    Most of this request (800k ADA) goes into legal setup especially the Cayman foundation and while I understand why that’s being done, it still feels like a big upfront cost for something that doesn’t directly create value yet. We’re basically funding the structure before we’ve fully agreed on how the full 50M ADA liquidity plan will play out.

    There’s also a bit of a “point of no return” feeling here. Once the legal entity is created and the structure is in place, it becomes much harder for the community to rethink or adjust the overall approach later.

    I don’t think this is a bad proposal far from it. The team clearly thought about legal risks, accountability, and transparency, which is good to see. I just feel like we’re moving into a fairly complex setup with real costs and long-term implications, and I’m not 100% convinced we’ve aligned on the bigger picture yet.

  • No26.7K ₳Rationale

    No author, no vote. IDK who the fuck 'WE' is.

  • Yes25.7K ₳No rationale
  • No15.3K ₳No rationale
  • Yes10.6K ₳Rationale

    i'm like proposal so i vote yes

  • Abstain8.1K ₳No rationale
  • No6.7K ₳No rationale
  • No4.7K ₳No rationale
  • No4.4K ₳No rationale
  • Yes682 ₳No rationale
  • Yes618.5 ₳No rationale
  • Abstain153.7 ₳No rationale
  • No0 ₳No rationale
  • YesChanged0 ₳History

    Earlier votes

    No3mo agoSuperseded

    recasting vote to yes. while true the protocols should be doing more and reinvesting in their own growth. maybe treasury needs to step in since they have not been doing so.

    No4mo agoSuperseded

    no. vague.

  • Yes0 ₳No rationale