Pogun: Capital Without Compromise
7 of 7 committee members voted
- Ace Alliance71aa5b3a…8f04YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Ace Alliance finds the proposed "Pogun: Capital Without Compromise" Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action Constitutional.
This Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action (TWGA) requests ₳12,290,000 (approximately $2,950,000 USD at a reference rate of $0.24/ada) to fund a twelve-month delivery program (Q2 2026 through Q1 2027) for the Pogun protocol: a non-margin peer-to-peer credit market, an integrated yield application, and a BitVM-based trust-minimized Bitcoin bridge. Pogun is developed by Input Output, and pursuant to Section 6.4 of the proposal, a written off-chain Legal Contract will be entered into between Input Output and Cardano Development Holdings, administered by Intersect.
Article II.6.1 (Metadata Format). The metadata is hosted at an immutable IPFS anchor (
ipfs://QmVdGh1cXgsMXGRS7mzxurxtkaqhU7VJMjx4piNSSHrBs2) and the anchor hash (32e2975fc7645b394806fc26651f558bb90a20705a606298633c66f8c6798168) is recorded on-chain. Post-submission tampering is cryptographically foreclosed. The proposal conforms to CIP-108 structure.Article II.6.2 (Sufficient Rationale). The proposal provides a title, abstract, motivation, full rationale across credit market, yield application, and bridge components, a governance and advisory structure, a technical specification, a financial model, KPIs against Vision 2030 targets, phased deliverables and milestones, a budget and administration framework, prior funding disclosure, and a reporting commitment. The required minimum content is present.
Article II.7.1 (Terms of the Withdrawal). The proposal specifies the purpose (delivery of the three Pogun components, plus operations and yield expansion readiness). The delivery period is Q2 2026 through Q1 2027, broken into four sequential phases each tied to a tranche disbursement. Relevant costs are itemized in Section 6.2 across five categories (Product/Engineering/R&D 51%, Growth 19%, Security Audits 13%, Legal & Compliance 10%, Ops & Infrastructure 7%). Refund circumstances are enumerated in Section 6.5 across five distinct triggers: milestone failure with no remediation within 90 days, team dissolution, fundamental technical infeasibility of the BitVM bridge as determined by independent technical review, voluntary termination, and partial delivery. The terms requirement is satisfied.
Article II.7.2 (Prior Funding Disclosure). Section 7 of the proposal discloses that no prior treasury funds have been directed toward Pogun specifically, and separately discloses Input Output's broader treasury funding history across five workstreams (Blockfrost, Catalyst, IOE, IOR, Governance), totalling ₳130,708,860 allocated with ₳78,459,777 received to date, each with its corresponding governance action identifier. The Constitution requires disclosure, not absence, of prior funding; the disclosure requirement is satisfied.
Article II.7.3 (Net Change Limit). A Net Change Limit of 350,000,000 ada covering epochs 613 to 713 is in effect. The 12,290,000 ada requested in this proposal does not exceed the remaining NCL balance.
Article II.7.4 (Periodic Independent Audits and Oversight Metrics). The proposal allocates 13% of the total budget (₳1,597,700 / $383,500) to security audits, including a TxPipe formal audit of the credit market smart contracts (Phase 1, with completion expected by 27 May 2026), independent audits for bridge contracts, proof circuits, and operator software (Phase 3), and ongoing third-party assurer review of milestone completion (Section 6.4, funded from this withdrawal). Oversight metrics are implemented through Intersect's delivery assurance function, an on-chain TRSC/PSSC framework with a five-member Oversight Committee (Sundae Labs, Cardano Foundation, Dquadrant, Xerberus, NMKR) providing checks and balances on Intersect administration, and a community-auditable dashboard. Quarterly reporting (Section 8) covers fund usage, milestone status, and on-chain reconciliation of treasury return payments.
Article II.7.5 (Designated Administrator). Intersect is designated as administrator pursuant to a Legal Contract with Cardano Development Holdings. Administrative actions over the Treasury Reserve Smart Contract and Project-Specific Smart Contracts require multi-party authorization across Intersect admins, Intersect leadership, and the external Oversight Committee, with thresholds varying by action type (Fund, Disperse, Pause/Resume, Sweep, Reorganize). A third-party assurer signs off milestone completion at each phase gate.
Article II.7.6 (Custody and Delegation). Section 6.5 states that all administrator-held ada will be kept in separate, community-auditable accounts. Section 6.4 specifies that all instances of the TRSC and PSSCs cannot be staked with an SPO and will be delegated to the auto-abstain predefined DRep. This has been verified. The proposal cites the existing 2025 TRSC reserve contract address (
stake17xzc8pt7fgf0lc0x7eq6z7z6puhsxmzktna7dluahrj6g6ghh5qjr) and contemplates migration to a 2026 reserve contract via the on-chain disburse action. This satisfies the custody and neutrality requirements.Appendix I (Guardrails).
- TREASURY-02a: The 12,290,000 ada requested does not exceed the 350M ada NCL.
- TREASURY-03a: The withdrawal is denominated in ada as required.
Ace Alliance finds the proposed "Pogun: Capital Without Compromise" Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action Constitutional.
- Cardano Curia84feba94…6bd5YesActive · term ends epoch 799Rationale
Cardano Curia finds this Treasury Withdrawal constitutional under the Cardano Constitution (v2.4), because (as finalized) it is properly specified and includes immutable canonical documentation plus the required administration/oversight, auditability, and custody controls for a Treasury Withdrawal.
What is being proposed
This governance action proposes a Treasury Withdrawal from the Cardano Treasury to fund the scope described in the action’s canonical proposal referenced from GovTool.
Constitutional and guardrails consistency (v2.4)
A Treasury Withdrawal is constitutional when it meets (a) the governance action standards for a stable, legible, immutable off-chain reference (URL + hash / content-addressed reference), and (b) the Treasury Withdrawals standards requiring: clear purpose and delivery period; relevant costs/expenses; refund/return circumstances; disclosure of prior treasury receipts (last 24 months); Net Change Limit compliance; allocation for independent audits and oversight metrics; designation of one or more administrators responsible for monitoring funds and verifying deliverables; and segregated auditable holding accounts (delegated to predefined abstain) for any funds held by administrators prior to onward disbursement.
Basis for a YES finding (positive)
Cardano Curia supports constitutionality because the finalized submission state:
- Locks the canonical proposal to an immutable reference with a verifiable content hash (reducing bait-and-switch risk).
- Specifies purpose, delivery period, and cost/expense framing sufficient for responsible treasury stewardship.
- Designates administrators / responsible parties and includes oversight metrics and reporting expectations.
- Includes independent audit provisions and budget allocation for audit/oversight.
- Implements custody controls consistent with the Constitution (segregated, auditable holding arrangements for administrator-held funds, delegated to predefined abstain until disbursement).
Determination
For the reasons above, Cardano Curia determines this Treasury Withdrawal is constitutional under Constitution v2.4, provided the on-chain references exactly match the immutable canonical documents (content/hash match).
Cardano Curia votes YES on constitutionality (5–0). The action is constitutional under Constitution v2.4 given immutable documentation and explicit administration/auditability/custody controls consistent with Treasury Withdrawal standards.
- Cardano Japan Council725d4d44…7b31YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
We consider this governance action to be constitutional.
This proposal is a Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action to withdraw ₳12,290,000 from the Cardano Treasury for Pogun’s “Capital Without Compromise” project. Regarding Article 2, Section 6, Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Cardano Constitution, this proposal adopts an immutable off-chain reference using IPFS. Furthermore, the proposal text includes the title, summary, rationale, technical specifications, roadmap, deliverables, budget, repayment conditions, audit framework, fund management methods, KPIs, risk management, and other details; we therefore determine that it presents the information required for a Governance Action. Regarding Article 2, Section 7, Paragraphs 1 and 2, this proposal states that the purpose of the Treasury Withdrawal is to build a Bitcoin credit market, a yield DApp, and a BitVM bridge. It clearly outlines a phased delivery schedule spanning Q2 2026 to Q1 2027, milestone-based disbursement, budget allocation, and repayment conditions. Furthermore, the Prior Funding Disclosure includes information on past Treasury allocations to Input Output. Regarding Article 2, Section 7, Paragraph 3, the requested amount for this proposal is ₳12,290,000, which falls within the 350M ADA Net Change Limit applicable to Epochs 613-713 at the time of submission. Furthermore, the requested amount for this proposal is stated in ADA, and the USD equivalent is provided for reference only. Article 2, Section 7, Paragraphs 4 and 5 describe the audit and oversight framework, including third-party guarantees, the Oversight Committee, audits, reporting obligations, and dashboards, with Intersect designated as the administrator. Furthermore, Article 2, Section 7, Paragraph 6 describes the use of Treasury Reserve Smart Contract (TRSC) and Project-Specific Smart Contracts (PSSC) for segregated management, a structure designed for on-chain auditability, non-delegation to SPOs, and delegation to auto-abstain DReps. We determine that this structure is intended to align with the requirements of “auditable by the Cardano Community,” “separate accounts,” “not delegated to a SPO,” and “delegated to a predefined abstain voting option.” Therefore, as no clear conflict with the Cardano Constitution has been identified, we determine that this proposal is constitutional.
For the reasons stated above, we determine that it is constitutional.
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecYesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
We have determined that this treasury withdrawal governance action is constitutional.
The governance action with ID "gov_action1w0s...uae57l" and title "Pogun: Capital Without Compromise" is a Treasury Withdrawal, and is therefore subject to the following sections and guardrails in the Cardano Constitution.
ARTICLE II, Section 6 of the Cardano Constitution states that governance actions must follow a standardized and legible format, including a URL hosting an immutable document and a corresponding hash, and must provide sufficient rationale including a title, abstract, justification, and supporting materials.
This governance action includes a valid URL and hash, which matches the hash of the off-chain documentation referenced. The rationale also meets the minimum content specified in this section.
ARTICLE II, Section 7 specifies that Treasury Withdrawal governance actions must include the following:
1. Purpose, Delivery Period, Costs, and Refund Conditions
This governance action specifies:
- The purpose of the withdrawal as "Pogun delivers three integrated components: Credit Market... Yield... Bridge... To execute this roadmap, this treasury withdrawal requests ₳12.29M (equivalent to $2.95M USD at a reference rate of $.24/₳)."
- Under the heading "Deliverables, Milestones & Disbursement Gates" the period for delivery of the proposed activities is between Q2 2026 and Q1 2027
- The relevant costs and expenses under the heading "Budget Allocation"
- The circumstances under which funds may be refunded to the Cardano Treasury as "If the project fails, if the team dissolves, or if the bridge proves infeasible, undisbursed funds are returned"
These elements fulfil the requirements of Article II, Section 7(1).
2. Prior Treasury Funding Disclosure
ARTICLE II, Section 7(2) requires disclosure of whether the prospective recipient has received ada from the Cardano Treasury within the last 24 months.
This governance action states that "No funds from any prior Treasury allocation have been directed toward Pogun development. This proposal represents Pogun's first request for Cardano Treasury funding. Input Output has received ADA from the Cardano Treasury across multiple workstreams in the prior 24 months.". This fulfils the requirement of ARTICLE II, Section 7(2).
3. Net Change Limit (NCL)
ARTICLE II, Section 7(3) requires that Treasury Withdrawals must not exceed the Net Change Limit.
The Net Change Limit in effect at the time of submission of this vote on-chain is the governance action with ID "gov_action1m3x...4jsr7q".
- A. Current NCL Amount: 350000000 ada
- B. Current NCL Time Period: Epoch 613 to Epoch 713 (Inclusive)
- C. Total of Treasury Withdrawals within the Current NCL Time Period: 67842000 ada
- D. Amount of this Treasury Withdrawal: 12290000 ada
- E. "C" plus "D" = 80132000 ada
- F. "A" minus "E" = 269868000 ada
As the value of "F" is greater than or equal to zero, this governance action fulfils the NCL requirement.
4. Audit Allocation and Oversight Metrics
ARTICLE II, Section 7(4) states "Treasury Withdrawals actions shall require an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics as to the use of such ada."
This governance action states that "Acceptance of the work will be supported by a 3rd Party Assurer, who will be responsible for reviewing and signing off the work completed at each project milestone against the corresponding milestone deliverables detailed within the Legal Contract. This work is funded from a portion of this treasury withdrawal.", which fulfils the requirements of ARTICLE II, Section 7(4).
5. Designated Administrators
ARTICLE II, Section 7(5) requires that one or more administrators are designated to monitor fund usage and ensure deliverables are achieved.
This governance action states that "A written off-chain Legal Contract will be created between Input Output and the Cardano Development Holdings (CDH), as mandated by the Constitution, and will be administered by Intersect.", which fulfils this requirement.
6. Fund Management Requirements
ARTICLE II, Section 7(6) states "Any ada received from a Cardano Blockchain treasury withdrawal, so long as such ada is being held by an administrator prior to further disbursement to the Treasury Withdrawal Recipient, must be kept in one or more separate accounts that can be audited by the Cardano Community, and such accounts shall not be delegated to an SPO but must be delegated to the predefined abstain voting option."
This governance action specifies the following withdrawal address, which at the time of assessment is not delegated to an SPO and is delegated to the auto abstain voting option:
- stake17xzc8pt7fgf0lc0x7eq6z7z6puhsxmzktna7dluahrj6g6ghh5qjr
Finally, the guardrails that require consideration for this governance action are TREASURY-01a, TREASURY-02a, and TREASURY-03a. These are addressed as follows:
- TREASURY-01a - The net change limit with governance action ID "gov_action1m3x...4jsr7q" is currently in effect, after being "agreed by the DReps via an on-chain governance action with a threshold of greater than 50% of the active voting stake".
- TREASURY-02a - As per the above assessment, this treasury withdrawal does not exceed the current Net Change Limit.
- TREASURY-03a - This treasury withdrawal is denominated in ada.
We therefore find this governance action Constitutional.
This governance action sufficiently fulfils the criteria specified for treasury withdrawals in the Cardano Constitution, so is deemed constitutional.
- KtorZ64f97568…3a49YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
Okay, with remarks.
Disclaimer: given the similarities in templates between all proposals from the Input Output Group, I have will re-use the same rationale even though each proposal has been assessed independently, rather than repeating the same points 9 times.
All 9 proposals are compliant with the constitution although it is worth underscoring that:
Many specified budgets are rather imprecise and allow a lot of undefined work that cannot be clearly assigned to a deliverable.
While third party audits are mentioned, no frequency, scope or designated auditor are specified. Plus, audits from previous withdrawals are nowhere to be seen, which raises more questions when it comes to future audits...
Some proposals such as the "IO & Midgard Labs: L2 Scalability Initiative" contain highly speculative and forward-looking claims that have yet to be proven yet are presented as truth without sufficient data to back them up.
However, given the timing of my vote (i.e. quite late in the voting period), there is not much point arguing about those points that have already been visibly discussed by DReps.
- Phil_uplc68bb0b42…8746YesActive · term ends epoch 799Rationale
- Tingvard646d1b3a…be43YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Tingvard judges the “Pogun: Capital Without Compromise” treasury withdrawal governance action constitutional.
This governance action satisfies the procedural requirements for a treasury withdrawal under Article II, Section 6 and Article II, Section 7.
The proposal includes a title, abstract, rationale, supporting materials, and specifies the purpose, delivery period, costs, oversight structure, refund conditions, and prior treasury receipts as required under Article II, Section 7, §1 and §2.
The proposal defines administrators responsible for monitoring and disbursement of funds through Intersect-managed smart contracts and oversight structures, satisfying Article II, Section 7, §5.
The proposal allocates funding for audits, assurance, and oversight mechanisms, satisfying Article II, Section 7, §4.
The proposal further states that administrator-held funds will not delegate to SPOs and will delegate only to the predefined auto-abstain DRep option, satisfying Article II, Section 7, §6.
The governance action is denominated in ada and does not exceed the active Net Change Limit at the time of submission, in accordance with TREASURY-02a and TREASURY-03a.
Tingvard therefore finds that the governance action procedurally satisfies the constitutional requirements applicable to treasury withdrawal governance actions.Tingvard finds this governance action constitutional.