Parameter Change (51f495aa#0)
5 of 7 committee members voted
- Cardano Atlantic Council07e0eb70…5bdeNoResigned · term ends epoch 580Rationale
We find this governance action, as proposed, to be unconstitutional.
We find this governance action, as proposed, to be unconstitutional. Due to an
unforeseen issue with the submission of the governance action [2] this
action does not propose any changes to the network parameters which is in direct
conflict to its stated goal of modifying Plutus v3 Cost Models. This is in
conflict with Article III, Section 6, Paragraph 2 and 3 [3] of the Interim
Cardano Constitution which state:Any governance action proposal reaching the on-chain governance stage shall
be identical in content as to the final off-chain version of such
governance action proposal.Hard Fork Initiation and Protocol Parameter Change governance actions should
undergo sufficient technical review and scrutiny as mandated by the Cardano
Blockchain Guardrails to ensure that the governance action does not endanger
the security, functionality or performance of the Cardano Blockchain.
Governance actions should address their expected impact on the Cardano
Blockchain ecosystem.— Interim Cardano Constitution, Article III, Section 6, Paragraph 2 & 3
Because the published action does not match the circulated and socialized intent
or outcomes in the off-chain version, we must find this proposal to be
Unconstitutional. - Cardano Foundation6796d87d…c280NoExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale unavailable
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecNoExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
We have determined that this governance action is unconstitutional, due to the absence of sufficient rationale to justify the change.
Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution states "Any governance action submitted to Ada holders for approval shall require a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash linked to documented off-chain content. Sufficient rationale shall be provided to justify the requested change to the Cardano Blockchain."
The anchor URL included on-chain for the governance action with ID "51f495aa23f4b3...2f74#0" is https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IntersectMBO/governance-actions/refs/heads/main/mainnet/2024-10-21-ppu/metadata.jsonld. At the time of submission of this vote on-chain, the anchor URL did not return a document with sufficient rationale for the requested change. Instead returning "404: Not Found". As this violates Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution, we find this governance action Unconstitutional.
We determined that this governance action is unconstitutional because it violates Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution.
- Emurgodc2b0706…89b8NoExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
We have determined that this governance action is unconstitutional, due to the absence of sufficient rationale to justify the change.
Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution states "Any governance action submitted to Ada holders for approval shall require a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash linked to documented off-chain content. Sufficient rationale shall be provided to justify the requested change to the Cardano Blockchain."
The anchor URL included on-chain for the governance action with ID "51f495aa23f4b3...2f74#0" is https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IntersectMBO/governance-actions/refs/heads/main/mainnet/2024-10-21-ppu/metadata.jsonld. At the time of submission of this vote on-chain, the anchor URL did not return a document with sufficient rationale for the requested change. Instead returning "404: Not Found". As this violates Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution, we find this governance action Unconstitutional.
We determined that this governance action is unconstitutional because it violates Article III Section 6 Paragraph 1 of the Interim Constitution.
- Intersect Constitutional Council85c47dd4…bf64NoExpired · term ends epoch 580Rationale
The Intersect Council votes the proposed protocol parameter update unconstitutional due to missing rationale and without correct changes intended by the proposal.
Understanding of facts
The protocol parameter change governance action is a proposal to modify plutus V3 cost models as per the title of the proposal “Plutus V3 Cost Model Parameter Changes Prior to Chang#2” however the rationale in the anchored file is no longer to be found. It is the Intersect Councils impression that due to an error the protocol changes were submitted on a node v9 and this meant that the node discarded proposed changes that would have been included with a node v10. Due to this error it was decided to remove the rationale to avoid confusion for votes on what proposal was the valid one to vote on. We also note that the proposal does not propose any network changes given this error.Rationale:
The question is if a protocol parameter change proposal that is not as intended by the proposer is a constitutional proposal?Article 3 section 6 paragraph 2 reads that “Any governance action proposal reaching the on-chain governance stage shall be identical in content as to the final off-chain version of such governance action proposal.”
In this case the action proposed included cost model parameter changes while the version put on-chain would not be identical to the intended off-chain version. The Intersect Council believes that the intent of how the final off-chain version should look like matters for the interpretation of what is the final off-chain version. One of this paragraphs functions is to ensure that there is no mismatch between what is proposed and what ends up as the final off-chain version. Here in effect nothing is proposed due to a error and this is not matching the intent nor any changes in any off-chain version.
Also due to the rationale being changed a question becomes if an on purpose removed rationale makes a proposal unconstitutional?
Article 3 section 6 paragraph 1 reads that “Any governance action submitted to Ada holders for approval shall require a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash linked to documented off-chain content. Sufficient rationale shall be provided to justify the requested change to the Cardano Blockchain. The rationale shall include, at a minimum, a title, abstract, reason for the proposal, and relevant supporting materials.”
In this case the documented off-chain content was removed. As in our understanding of the facts section this was likely done to remove confusion in what proposal to vote for. In general a removed off-chain document will likely make a proposal unconstitutional but there could be circumstances such as a last minute bug when the community had all read the supporting documents that could in theory make a proposal still valid. One of the intents of not having a change can be read in the last paragraph of the article: “All Ada holders shall have the right to ensure that the process for participating in, submitting and voting on governance actions is open and transparent and is protected from undue influence and manipulation.” A proposal for protocol parameter changes without supporting material for those changes are not sufficiently transparent and is unconstitutional. We also note this missing supporting material does not match the material that was socialized before the proposal.
A small note of independence
Due to this being the first time Intersect is submitting a governance action the Intersect Council notes we as a council will vote strictly based on the constitutionality of governance actions including those from Intersect. The Intersect Constitutional Council is a separate body from the Technical Steering Committee who requested this parameter change to be put forward.The Intersect Council votes the protocol parameter change unconstitutional due to missing rationale and changes not as the intent of the proposal.
- Cardano Japan Council (ICC)4012cab5…0755Not votedExpired · term ends epoch 580No rationale
- Input | Output3c9ebce6…1e4cNot votedExpired · term ends epoch 580No rationale