Reimburse Ikigai Info Governance Action Deposit.
173 DReps voted · 56 with a rationale · 7 re-voted unchanged
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes1M ₳No rationale
- No984.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes929.9K ₳Rationale
We vote YES on this proposal because early participants in Cardano governance should not be punished for bugs in the system.
The original Ikigai governance action was submitted very early after on-chain governance became available, and the deposit loss was caused by a technical issue rather than malicious behavior or misuse of the governance process. In our view, reimbursing the affected submitter is fair and sends the right signal to early contributors who helped test and use Cardano governance in practice.
We also do not see a meaningful risk of this creating a problematic precedent, because the issue can be verified on-chain and is tied to a specific historical bug. This makes the case clearly distinguishable from ordinary failed or expired governance actions.
For these reasons, we support reimbursing the lost deposit.
- Yes927.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes926K ₳No rationale
- Yes884.5K ₳No rationale
- Yes870.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes866.3K ₳No rationale
- No829.9K ₳Rationale
We support the refund but we are voting NO for two reasons:
1- It is unclear the author is the legitimate recipient. The Gov Action should clearly state that the address that payed the deposit is the same recieving the reimbursment.
2- The long time that has passed is responsability of the proposer. We do not agree with the 3k Ada asked to compensate lost rewards. This reumbusrment should have been asked for a long time ago.
We will vote YES is those two points are adressed. - Yes796.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes792.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes742.6K ₳Rationale
Yes
- Yes737.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes604.7K ₳Rationale
- Yes591.1K ₳Rationale
Thanks to the twitter person who verified that this is indeed the same person who lost the deposit
- Yes579.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes573.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes568K ₳Rationale
Return the funding to the rightful owner.
- Yes481.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes479.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes466.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes435.4K ₳No rationale
- Abstain433.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes393.6K ₳No rationale
- Abstain379.5K ₳No rationale
- No366.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes356.1K ₳Rationale
This reimbursement is long overdue. Send the deposit plus its lost staking rewards back to the original address and let it be done.
- YesChanged342.8K ₳Rationale
This apparently needs explaining, but the concept of ownership is as follows - this amount does not belong to the treasury so it should be returned.
It is a clear exception to my dRep statement and mission to prevent excessive spending. Other possible exceptions for a YES vote are:
- Loans with BTC/Stable-coin collateral
- Burning treasury funds
- Setting NCL to the amount of YoY treasury income.
All the best and happy voting.
Earlier votes
Abstain3mo agoSuperseded
Yes3mo agoSuperseded
- Yes330.6K ₳No rationale
- Yes321.6K ₳No rationale
- Abstain318.1K ₳Rationale
Abstaining, as I’m part of the Cardano Constitution Committee Tingvard.
Reading proposals and staying updated, just like you.
Thanks to all fellow DReps who are also doing the hard work.
Follow and DM me on X: @kenerik if you have any questions. - Yes314.4K ₳Rationale
I am voting YES to reimburse the 103,000 ADA deposit to the submitter of the Ikigai Info Action. Their deposit was lost due to a node code bug, and making them whole is a matter of basic fairness and maintaining community trust in our governance system.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I am voting YES to finally resolve this outstanding issue and make this governance pioneer whole. The submitter lost their original deposit entirely due to an on-chain node code bug. Approving this request for 103,000 ADA correctly returns the 100,000 ADA deposit along with 3,000 ADA to compensate for missed staking rewards. Returning these funds is simply the right thing to do ethically and practically to safeguard trust in our ecosystem.
- No313.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes297K ₳Rationale
I can't believe we didn't do this back in October!
- Yes285.2K ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted280.5K ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes2mo agoSuperseded
Yes3mo agoSuperseded
- Yes275.2K ₳Rationale
I am voting YES on “Reimburse Ikigai Info Governance Action Deposit” because it is a narrowly scoped, corrective withdrawal that reimburses 100,000 ADA lost due to a documented node bug affecting an early Info governance action, with a modest 3,000 ADA top‑up to approximate missed staking rewards. The proposal is transparent, constitutionally compliant, and sends funds directly to the original submitter without administrator custody or additional overhead, which makes it a simple and proportionate way to resolve a long‑standing issue and reinforce trust in Cardano’s governance system.
- Yes272.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes268.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes260.8K ₳No rationale
- No233.3K ₳No rationale
- Yes216.4K ₳No rationale
- Yes196.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes189.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes169.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes161.1K ₳No rationale
- Abstain157.8K ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted155.3K ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes2mo agoSuperseded
- Yes149.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes142.9K ₳No rationale