Set a 300 million ADA Net Change Limit for Epochs 563–635
191 DReps voted · 56 with a rationale · 7 changed their vote · 4 re-voted unchanged
Open a row to read the rationale.
Changed votes: 3 to yes, 3 to no, 1 to abstain, together voting with 109.2M ₳ of voting power.
- NoChanged5.7M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
- Abstain5.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.5M ₳No rationale
- Abstain5.1M ₳No rationale
- Abstain4.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- No4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.5M ₳No rationale
- No4.2M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "Não" nesta ação de governança (637e3c256da9c1...eb7300), pois alterar o limite de gastos previamente definido, neste momento, colocaria em risco a continuidade do desenvolvimento e geraria incertezas para os construtores.
[English]
We chose to vote "No" on this governance action (637e3c256da9c1...eb7300) because changing the previously defined spending limit at this time would risk the continuity of development and create uncertainty for builders. - Yes4M ₳No rationale
- No3.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.9M ₳No rationale
- No3.6M ₳Rationale
We previously supported a lower NCL which did not pass. We are now at a point where we believe the community has spoken and we should therefore just proceed with the NCL that has been voted yes on. Additional proposals at this stage just add additional confusion and we should now just be getting on with what has been agreed
- No3.1M ₳No rationale
- No3M ₳Rationale
This NCL surpasses my personal NCL of 250M ADA and violates my stance on fiscal responsibility. I went through the Ekklesia budget voting process, and could not find enough worthwhile proposals to surpass my NCL of 250M ADA. I am concerned that NCL will end up being a spending cap that will be filled every time, so I have to vote as such.
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Abstain2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- No2.7M ₳Rationale
私は、本提案に対してNO票を投じます。これは、私が以前350M ADAのNCL提案に対して慎重ながらも賛同の意を示した判断と軸を一にするものです。
2025年前半は、Cardanoにとって分散型ガバナンスの制度実装、L2技術の導入、ミドルウェアとトークノミクス設計の革新など、全方位的な基盤強化が求められている局面です。私は当時、この重要なフェーズにおいて、資金制約が進展の障害とならぬよう、例外的な支出上限拡大に賛同する立場をとりました。
今回の提案は、まだ審議中または承認直後の複数の重要提案の執行余地に影響を及ぼす可能性があり、現段階では時期尚早とも考えられます。また、350Mからの引き下げについては、その必要性や緊急性を裏付ける根拠が十分に共有されていないと感じています。結果として、先に設定された財政方針との整合性が揺らぐ懸念もあります。
したがって私は、1. 現行の350M NCLを当面維持、2. 実行フェーズにある重要提案を財政的に支援、3. 将来的なNCL見直しは次期財政年度の状況を見据えて検討すべき、という立場をとります。
本判断は、拡張的支出の常態化を望むものではなく、今この時期に必要な柔軟性を確保するための戦略的意思表示です。
I cast a NO vote on this proposal. This decision is consistent with the position I previously took when I supported the 350M ADA NCL proposal, with a cautious but strategic outlook.
The first half of 2025 marks a critical period for Cardano—one that requires foundational development across multiple domains, including the implementation of decentralized governance, the deployment of L2 technologies, and innovation in middleware and tokenomics. At that time, I expressed support for an exceptional increase in the spending cap, recognizing the need for flexibility in such a pivotal phase.
This proposal, however, may constrain the execution of several important initiatives that are still under review or were only recently approved. At this stage, it may be premature. Furthermore, the rationale for reducing the limit from 350M ADA has not been clearly substantiated in terms of necessity or urgency. As such, it raises concerns about consistency with the fiscal direction already established.
Therefore, I advocate the following: 1. Maintain the current 350M ADA NCL in the near term, 2. Support critical proposals already in the execution pipeline, and 3. Reassess the NCL in light of the next fiscal cycle.
This is not a call for continued high spending, but rather a strategic expression in favor of preserving the flexibility needed at this particular juncture.
- No2.5M ₳Rationale
I would like to see 150-250 as anything higher does not fully ensure the treasury will continue to grow.
- No2.4M ₳No rationale
- No2.3M ₳No rationale
- No2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- No1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- No1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.4M ₳No rationale
- No1.4M ₳No rationale
- No1.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.3M ₳Rationale
I will vote YES to establish a Net Change Limit (NCL) of 300 million ADA covering epochs 563 to 635.
Rationale
Prior Voting Behavior
I have consistently supported a disciplined yet pragmatic approach to Treasury management.I previously voted NO on a 200M ADA NCL (too restrictive) and YES on a 350M ADA NCL (more aligned with strategic flexibility).
In the Intersect budget temperature check, I backed around 345M ADA worth of proposals — higher than my ideal comfort level, but in recognition of the critical need to fund governance and ecosystem infrastructure.
The Intersect proposal has since been refined to 275M ADA. It is still a significant amount of ADA, but I agree with the areas covered in the budget for critical infrastructure and growth. Therefore, I am now more comfortable with reducing the NCL from 350M ADA to 300M ADA. 300 MM ADa leaves an extra 25M ADA for other proposals, such as the Amaru Node proposal, which I have voted YES on.
Approving a 300M ADA NCL balances fiscal prudence with strategic investment. I feel comfortable with 300M ADA as a middle ground — it is high enough to fund critical initiatives, but low enough to prevent excessive overspending. A 300M ADA NCL aligns with projected Treasury inflows. It sends a signal of responsibility and ambition: that we are serious about scaling Cardano while also committed to preserving Treasury sustainability.
Although it is not guaranteed, I am writing this rationale assuming the Intersect info action will be approved, based on the results observed so far.
I fully acknowledge we are authorizing the withdrawal of a significant amount of ADA. Treasury stewardship must remain paramount. However, platforms operating within exponential technology ecosystems like Cardano cannot afford underinvestment at a critical growth phase.
The risks of underfunding key infrastructure and governance maturation far outweigh the carefully managed risks of targeted investment. This is the time to establish a robust foundation — and it requires deliberate, well-scoped financial commitments.
VOTE0011
- Yes1.2M ₳Rationale
I support this NCL because 300M ADA matches the treasury’s expected inflow for the same 73-epoch window (Epoch 563 – 635), keeping withdrawals in line with deposits. It gives teams approved for 2025 a clear budget runway into early 2026 while staying below the 350 M cap I previously endorsed, preserving reserves for future cycles. A simple, inflation-neutral ceiling maintains fiscal discipline yet leaves room for essential infrastructure and governance work—exactly the balance our earlier votes aimed to achieve.
- NoChanged1.2M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
- Yes1.2M ₳Rationale
I support the 300M ADA NCL for 2025-2026 to enforce fiscal discipline, restricting the current 350M NCL and aligning more closely with treasury inflows and my preference for a 200M NCL.
This ceiling, covering 2025 and much of 2026, ensures development continuity while pressuring Treasury Withdrawal actions to further justify their proposals and amounts asked. My Eckklesia Budget Poll choices (~196M ADA) will reflect my voting on Treasury Withdrawals going forward, omnibus bills will be voted down. - Yes1.2M ₳Rationale
I vote YES on this proposal because:
This is a necessary next step to ensure continuity for 12-month budget cycles. Many current proposals are structured to begin in Q3 2025 and span one year. Without a Net Change Limit (NCL) that covers this full fiscal period, project implementation could be disrupted.
The 300M ADA limit aligns with the spending direction already approved by the community. DReps have previously approved a budget of approximately 281M ADA, but the corresponding withdrawal governance action has not yet been submitted. Setting the NCL at 300M ADA provides a buffer to adjust if needed.
Epochs 563–635 correspond to Q3 2025 through Q2 2026, making this a practical reference frame for future annual budget cycles. Having a fixed time window also helps stakeholders plan more effectively.
*Setting a 300M ADA NCL for this period is a reasonable step that balances fiscal prudence with the need for strategic ecosystem investment during a critical phase of the Voltaire era.
Japanese Translation
私はこの提案にYES票を投じます。その理由は以下の通りです：
本提案は、12か月予算サイクルの継続性を維持するために必要な次のステップです。現在の多くの提案は2025年第3四半期に開始し、1年間を予定しています。この期間全体をカバーするNet Change Limit（NCL）がなければ、プロジェクトの実行が中断される可能性があります。
300M ADAの上限は、すでにコミュニティによって承認された支出方針と整合しています。DRepたちは以前、約281M ADAの予算を承認しましたが、資金引き出しのガバナンスアクションはまだ提出されていません。NCLを300M ADAに設定することで、必要に応じた調整の余地が確保されます。
Epoch 563～635は2025年第3四半期から2026年第2四半期に対応し、将来の年間予算サイクルにおける標準的な時間枠としても妥当です。固定された期間を設けることで、関係者の計画立案が容易になります。
※この時期に300M ADAのNCLを設定することは、財政的慎重さとエコシステムへの戦略的投資の必要性のバランスを取る合理的な判断であり、Voltaire時代の重要な局面において極めて適切なステップです。
Vietnamese Translation
Tôi bỏ phiếu YES cho đề xuất này vì:
Đây là bước tiếp theo cần thiết để duy trì tính liên tục cho các ngân sách 12 tháng. Nhiều đề xuất hiện tại được thiết kế theo chu kỳ một năm, bắt đầu từ quý 3/2025. Nếu không có NCL bao phủ cả năm tài chính này, tiến trình triển khai sẽ bị gián đoạn.
Mức giới hạn 300M ADA phù hợp với định hướng chi tiêu đã được cộng đồng chấp thuận. Trước đó, các DRep đã phê duyệt ngân sách khoảng 281M ADA, nhưng hành động rút quỹ vẫn chưa được đệ trình. Thiết lập NCL ở mức 300M ADA đảm bảo có khoảng đệm tài chính để điều chỉnh nếu cần thiết.
Giai đoạn Epoch 563–635 tương ứng với Q3/2025 đến Q2/2026, rất hợp lý để sử dụng làm khung NCL chuẩn cho các chu kỳ ngân sách hằng năm về sau. Việc thiết lập khung thời gian cố định cũng giúp các bên lập kế hoạch dễ dàng hơn.
- Thiết lập NCL 300M ADA cho giai đoạn này là một bước đi hợp lý, dung hòa giữa quản trị tài chính thận trọng và nhu cầu đầu tư phát triển hệ sinh thái trong thời điểm quan trọng của giai đoạn Voltaire.
- Yes1.2M ₳No rationale
- No1.2M ₳No rationale
- Abstain1.1M ₳No rationale
- No1.1M ₳Rationale
The proposal to set a Net Change Limit (NCL) of 300M ADA spanning epochs 563 to 635 raises serious concerns from a governance and financial stewardship perspective. First, it is important to recall that the community has already sanctioned an NCL of 200M ADA, explicitly covering the entirety of 2025. This existing limit was established to ensure prudent, measured disbursement of Treasury funds aligned with clear accountability and project milestones.
Requesting an immediate increase to 300M ADA, effectively front-loading additional funds for both 2025 and 2026, circumvents the discipline of periodic review and assessment. It undermines the principle of incremental funding based on demonstrated outcomes, which is essential in safeguarding the Treasury and maintaining trust within the community. Approving a larger NCL now, without the benefit of evaluating the tangible results of projects funded under the current 200M ADA limit, risks diluting financial rigor and could set a precedent for less transparent budget expansions in the future.
Moreover, this approach conflicts with the strategic imperative to align financial governance with a business-minded, outcome-driven framework. The Cardano ecosystem’s long-term stability depends on measured, evidence-based decisions rather than speculative or convenience-driven increases. A more responsible and sustainable path would be to approve a new NCL for 2026 during Q3 2025, post comprehensive review of project milestones and Treasury inflows. This timing respects the community’s right to informed decision-making and ensures that Treasury allocations remain firmly tethered to performance and strategic priorities.
In light of these considerations, I strongly oppose the proposed NCL increase to 300M ADA at this juncture. Upholding financial discipline and transparency is paramount to preserving the integrity of Cardano’s governance and securing its future as the most decentralized, scientifically grounded PoS network. I therefore vote "No" on this governance action.
- Yes1.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes969.9K ₳No rationale
- No966.3K ₳No rationale
- No951.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes929.9K ₳No rationale