Info Action (4840e305#0)
153 DReps voted · 42 with a rationale · 2 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- No435.8M ₳Rationale
This proposal is planned to be resubmitted by the proposer, so I am voting NO to prevent the proposal from being adopted twice, before and after the resubmission.
この提案書は提案者により再提出が予定されています。そのため、再提出前と再提出後で二重に提案書が採択されるのを防ぐため、NOを投票します。
- Abstain332.2M ₳No rationale
- No222.9M ₳No rationale
- No120.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes92.2M ₳No rationale
- No91.5M ₳Rationale
I am voting NO because the governance action is invalid and will reportedly be resubmitted.
- No88.6M ₳No rationale
- No75.2M ₳No rationale
- Abstain74.5M ₳No rationale
- NoChanged62.7M ₳Rationale
Sorry mate, the metadata is invalid. Try again after it all expires.
Earlier votes
Abstain1y agoSuperseded
- No50.4M ₳No rationale
- Abstain49.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes48.6M ₳Rationale
This is a good example of utilizing treasury fund for ecosystem grow, these fund are not spent but are kept to grow DeFi ecosystem, which can be recalled back to treasury anytime through an Info Governance Action.
- Yes40.1M ₳No rationale
- Abstain38.1M ₳No rationale
- No34.6M ₳No rationale
- No34.3M ₳Rationale
We are voting "No" on this proposal due to invalid metadata.
- No33.5M ₳No rationale
- Abstain27.9M ₳Rationale
I support the principle of deploying some treasury funds to deepen stablecoin liquidity on Cardano, but for a first-time request of this nature, the 50M ADA ask plus relatively high management stipends feels a bit oversized. I would prefer a smaller pilot to validate the model and trim administrative costs. In addition, naming a seven-person multisig exposes those individuals to heightened physical-security and cyber-risk that is difficult to mitigate. It is also worth noting that due to tooling errors, this proposal will likely be re-submitted in the future. For these reasons I will vote ABSTAIN and look for a leaner, better-protected iteration when it is re-proposed in the future.
- No25.3M ₳Rationale
I am voting NO on this proposal. Could have been cool but the metadata is invalid.
- No23.5M ₳No rationale
- No21.5M ₳No rationale
- No21.5M ₳Rationale
I vote “NO on the proposal for a DeFi Liquidity Budget after an error in the submission process means that the hash values of the submitted proposal and accessible file do not match. This is an important part of the proposal process in order to ensure integrity of the voting process. The issue was identified early on and the proposer has already stated their intention to resubmit the proposal in the future once this one expires and the governance action deposit is returned. Therefore, this is a quick and easy decision in this instance.
- No21.4M ₳Rationale
I vote NO because:
The full content of the proposal is not clearly displayed on GovTool, making it difficult to evaluate transparently and thoroughly.
Approving the current version could lead to conflicts or duplication if the proposer later submits an updated version.
*I am open to reconsidering my vote once a complete and clearly presented version is resubmitted through the proper process.
Vietnamese Translation
Tôi bỏ phiếu NO vì:
Nội dung đầy đủ của đề xuất hiện không được hiển thị rõ ràng trên GovTool, gây khó khăn trong việc đánh giá minh bạch và toàn diện.
Việc thông qua bản hiện tại có thể dẫn đến xung đột hoặc trùng lặp khi bản mới được người đề xuất đệ trình sau đó (nếu có)
*Tôi sẵn sàng xem xét lại khi bản đề xuất được cập nhật đầy đủ, rõ ràng và nộp lại đúng quy trình.
Japanese Translation
私はNOに投票します。その理由は以下の通りです：
現在、この提案の完全な内容がGovTool上で明確に表示されておらず、透明性と網羅性のある評価が困難です。
提案者が後に更新版を提出した場合、現行バージョンを承認すると重複や矛盾が生じる可能性があります。
※ 提案が完全かつ明確に整理され、正式な手続きに従って再提出された場合には、再検討する意思があります。
- No21.1M ₳No rationale
- Abstain20.4M ₳No rationale
- No20.3M ₳No rationale
- No19.9M ₳No rationale
- No17.4M ₳Rationale
Cardano treasury funds should not be used to speculatively provide extra funding liquidity to chosen lending apps and DEXs, nor should treasury funds be used to purchase fiat backed stable coins. Selling treasury Ada for fiat backed stable coins will negatively impact the Ada price as well as negatively impact Cardano decentralisation through dependence upon the stable coin issuer.
- Abstain17.3M ₳No rationale
- No16.7M ₳No rationale
- No16.4M ₳No rationale
- No14.2M ₳No rationale
- No13.3M ₳Rationale
I am voting No on the proposal for a DeFi Liquidity Budget due to a critical procedural flaw: the hash values of the submitted proposal and the linked content do not match. This hash mismatch breaks the integrity of the proposal process and violates the governance standards established to ensure accountability and verifiability on-chain. The Constitutional Committee has already deemed the action unconstitutional, and the proposer has acknowledged the issue, stating their intention to resubmit the proposal once this one expires. Given this context, the decision to vote No is straightforward and procedural, not a judgment on the merits of the proposal itself.
- No12.1M ₳No rationale
- No11.1M ₳No rationale
- No10.9M ₳No rationale
- NoRevoted10.8M ₳History
Earlier votes
No1y agoSuperseded
- No8.8M ₳Rationale
このガバナンスアクションは、Invalid metadataです。\n\nThis governance action has invalid metadata.
- Abstain8.1M ₳No rationale
- Abstain7.6M ₳Rationale
I abstain from this vote as the proposers have indicated on social media that they intend to resubmit the proposal with some changes or adjustments to it.
- No5.9M ₳Rationale
There will be a resubmit by the proposer.
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- No5.3M ₳Rationale
No data available to read - therefore a no vote has been cast.
- Abstain4.6M ₳No rationale
- No4.6M ₳No rationale
- No4.4M ₳No rationale
- No4.2M ₳No rationale
- No4.1M ₳No rationale
- No4.1M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "Não" nesta ação de governança (gov_action1fpqwxp2kxvnntr8hpkh9q9djm78ccdww7qlhg5safugh4stmcwzqql5lauu), pois não foram estabelecidas as métricas de controle de qualidade que o seriam utilizadas para acompanhar a execução da proposta, bem como os condicionantes para liberação dos recursos solicitados.
[English]
We chose to vote "No" on this governance action (gov_action1fpqwxp2kxvnntr8hpkh9q9djm78ccdww7qlhg5safugh4stmcwzqql5lauu) because the quality control metrics that would be used to monitor the execution of the proposal were not established, nor were the conditions for the release of the requested funds.