Securing Generic Top-Level Domains for the Cardano Ecosystem
199 DReps voted · 79 with a rationale · 6 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes9.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes8.8M ₳Rationale
本提案は、Cardanoブランドの保護とエコシステムの長期的発展に資するものであり、財団自身の資金で実施される点も評価します。公共財としての意義を持つ取り組みであると考え、賛成します。\n\nI vote Yes on this proposal as it strengthens Cardano’s digital presence and safeguards its brand. I appreciate that it will be executed using the Foundation’s own resources and see this as a valuable initiative for the ecosystem’s long-term development.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
Positively surprised by this initiative. It came out of the blue for me and it does contribute to a new way of using governance actions and verifying the validity of a proposed course of action (which will have an ecosystem-wide impact) by - in this case - one of the founding entities. It is a motion that is effectively being pursued in the name of the community.
I do think founding entities have some form of bigger responsibility towards the community - its a bit like carrying a 'nobility title'. They come with strings attached. You can't just use the 'title' Founding Entity, but then also have an expectation not to be held to higher standards.
Very nice to see the Cardano Foundation proposing to fund this effort for registering new generic Top-Level Domains - and to secure a community mandate to do so. The latter part did not require an explicit confirmation from DReps, but doing so - sort of widens the legitimacy of this initiative.Essentially, if successfully implemented, this is also a marketing push that will be globally visible. Very nice.
I would also highlight an element from the plan: "to establish a dedicated Community Advisory Group to guide the management and development of the gTLDs".I would personally advise the CF to use this opportunity (creating a Community Advisory Group) - to explore the creation (or to document) possible templates for the creation of future functional Community Advisory Groups - for different purposes.
Obtaining community input in a fair and balance way, while not succumbing to analysis paralysis and in-fighting or disputes - is difficult. A successful process with the Community Advisory Group - could set out the best practices for providing community input in cases where there is a need to combine a lead (institutional) player - with feedback from a decentralized community.
Essentially, there could be some space to develop some proto-governance on-the-go (takeaway) solutions for specific initiatives. What comes to mind from real life as inspiration - for different purposes are Citizen Groups which advise through various mechanisms.
These - in real life include Advisory Boards - groups that provide input on specific issues, and ... maybe also important Assemblies, which are randomly selected groups that engage in deliberative processes to develop recommendations.
Well, back to the proposal. Proposing to fund it without Treasury funds - seems to be the right approach and a well balanced decision. Involving community players, developers and conducting consultations with them - is another point that I appreciate.
To keep it short, I see it as constructive and future-oriented.This is something new, that was not possible before. No reason for me to look back into relationships among founding entities. Our Cardano cards have been dealt and for brand new future initiatives (that do not involve any legacy commitments) - we have the starting point that we have. So, if I chose to move forward or move back - move forward.
- Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
Voting yes to signal support. This makes sense and I have an appreciation for the CF leveraging the Info action to signal community sentiment towards them doing this on-chain. I have nothing additional to add as a DRep either and agree fully with full-context provided by the CF and them taking into account the ICANN changes going into 2026. This is proactive, forward thinking, and may remove cost barriers to future opportunities. All of this at no cost to the treasury is an easy win.
- Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
Supportive.
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
STORM Partners is voting YES to support CF’s proposal to secure the .ada and .cardano domains for the ecosystem. The initiative aligns with CF’s stewardship of the Cardano trademark and strengthens the network’s digital identity. It could enable meaningful integrations between Web2 and Web3 by bridging traditional DNS infrastructure with projects such as Handshake, ADA Handle, and other emerging identity or decentralized naming solutions. CF is well-positioned to manage these domains responsibly and ensure they serve the ecosystem’s collective interests. By bringing this initiative on-chain, CF seeks community input that reinforces its legitimacy and increases the likelihood of successfully securing the registrations through ICANN.
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳Rationale
I support the Cardano Foundation's initiative to register and utilize the two gTLDs, particularly since the Foundation will fund and manage the costs using its own ADA holdings. My sole concern is the absence of details on average domain pricing for potential buyers compared to existing market rates. Nevertheless, I have faith that all aspects will be executed in the collective interest of the Cardano ecosystem.
- Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.1M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança (gov_action15dh2lt4qskmhl97vat8s0l552ruvddrlasa0jndg7lg43g0uju3qq78hvja), pois ela tem como objetivo fortalecer a identidade digital do ecossistema Cardano, garantindo que os domínios .ada e .cardano permaneçam sob gestão da comunidade. A iniciativa amplia a visibilidade do ecossistema, estimula a inovação entre os mundos Web2 e Web3 e assegura transparência e governança aberta, beneficiando toda a comunidade Cardano. Além disso, a proposta define que os fundos a serem utilizados serão aqueles já empenhados pelo tesouro à Fundação Cardano, não gerando, portanto, novos gastos ou ônus adicionais.
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action (gov_action15dh2lt4qskmhl97vat8s0l552ruvddrlasa0jndg7lg43g0uju3qq78hvja), because it aims to strengthen the digital identity of the Cardano ecosystem, ensuring that the .ada and .cardano domains remain under community management. The initiative enhances ecosystem visibility, promotes innovation between Web2 and Web3, and ensures transparency and open governance, benefiting the entire Cardano community. Furthermore, the proposal clarifies that the funds to be used are those already allocated by the treasury to the Cardano Foundation, thus not creating new expenses or additional financial commitments. - No3.8M ₳Rationale
While I can certainly see value in a top-level domain, I do not think this is what we need to spend an estimated $3.7M or almost $10M ADA right now. I do not believe adoption would be seriously affected by the addition or not of domains, nor would transaction quantity or DeFi use. This clearly looks like a nice-to-have but unessential window-dressing project.
I don't believe that enterprises are going factor having a Cardano domain or not into their decision making, nor are governments. As a former corporate marketing guy, I believe both will use their own brands and would consider it diluting their own branding by mixing it with ".ada" or ".cardano".
Users might like the vanity addresses, but that won't make this a profitable investment for Cardano's Treasury, just a white elephant we will be committed to pay at least $700,000 per year to maintain.
With Cardano's current needs, this is an easy and obvious no from me.
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
Approved for visibility, infrastructure and positioning.
Strength and honor.
- Yes3.4M ₳No rationale
- NoChanged3.1M ₳Rationale
Using genesis ADA or Cardano Foundation resources to secure generic top-level domains for the Cardano Ecosystem seems like a very large waste of time and resources:
There is no demand for this service - all those currently established in the Cardano ecosystem are using existing domains and are unlikely to switch or purchase a domain simply for a redirect.
Anyone can buy the domains and use them for potentially harmful purposes (ie scam sites mimicking legitimate sites). Legitimizing the .ada and .cardano domains will actually help make this problem worse.
The funds could be used in much better ways to support the Cardano ecosystem, like matching the resources allocated for the Stablecoin investment fund.
This is a focus only on the Cardano internal ecosystem. Those outside of Cardano are unlikely to care about this "investment", and we will not bring new users by spending funds on vanity websites for those already in our ecosystem. Onboarding new users to Cardano and retaining them is our #1 issue to be solved, this doesn't even rank.
Earlier votes
Abstain8mo agoSuperseded
As I have not yet had time to review this proposal, I have submitted a vote of Abstain for now.
- Yes3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳Rationale
yes but i want cash.ada and cash.cardano :D
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
カルダノブランドの確立は最優先事項です。.adaおよび.cardanoの取得は、分散型社会基盤としてのカルダノの信頼性を高め、Web2とWeb3を橋渡しする重要な一歩です。財団が自らの資金でこの公共基盤を確保する姿勢を強く支持します。
Establishing the Cardano brand is a top priority.
Securing the .ada and .cardano domains will strengthen Cardano’s credibility as decentralized public infrastructure and bridge the gap between Web2 and Web3.
I strongly support the Foundation’s initiative to take this proactive step using its own resources. - Abstain2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
Thanks for footing the bill CF! Let's gooooo.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳Rationale
Voting Yes. The Cardano Foundation is using its own funds to secure .ada and .cardano. By doing so, we keep control within the ecosystem, prevent misuse, and open opportunities for future Web3 innovation.
- Yes1.8M ₳Rationale
I'm voting YES because this protects Cardano's brand at zero cost to the treasury. The Foundation is self-funding this effort while the rare ICANN application window is open. Securing these domains prevents misuse and enables future innovations in user experience and identity.
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.7M ₳Rationale
Having our own .ada and .cardano domains gives Cardano a proper home on the internet. The Foundation pays for everything, so there's no risk for the community. These ICANN application windows don't open often, so if we miss this one, we'll be waiting for years. Easy yes.
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- No1.7M ₳No rationale
- No1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Abstain1.5M ₳No rationale