Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore
210 DReps voted · 81 with a rationale · 19 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes19.9M ₳Rationale
It is essential Cardano is this year at the world crypto stage in Singapore right before Token2049. With interoperability in full swing, we must show the world we are a Tier 1 crypto currency, by being present.
These events are critical for business development and forming future partnerships. - Yes17.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes17.3M ₳Rationale
Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore
- Abstain16.7M ₳Rationale
We are voting ABSTAIN on the Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore proposal.
The revised version is clearly stronger: it is decoupled from TOKEN2049, reduced by 22% to 7,800,000 ADA / $1.95M, includes clearer KPIs, a detailed budget, oversight, refund conditions, and CF increased its internal contribution to $380,000.
However, we are still not ready to vote YES. Even after the reduction, this remains a large treasury-funded event subsidy. The Summit is still far from self-sustaining, with a $450,000 revenue target against a $2.263M gross budget, and 6,240,000 ADA is available at kickoff before the event is delivered.
I understand the timing constraints and why the proposal was submitted outside the regular budget process. Still, I’m not convinced that renting expensive event space is the only, or necessarily the most efficient, path to institutional adoption. Cardano needs institutional outreach, but we should compare this against cheaper and more targeted formats: smaller invite-only meetings, side events, direct BD trips, private roundtables, or co-hosted partner events.
My abstain recognizes the improvements, but I would like to see a stronger sustainability path and clearer evidence that this format produces concrete ecosystem outcomes.
- No16.4M ₳Rationale
Vote: NO
- The revision is genuinely improved over the rejected original (14M ADA → 7.8M ADA, decoupled from TOKEN2049, better oversight)
- Core objection: $450K revenue against $2.26M budget — treasury absorbs ~80% with no repayment obligation
- Cardano Foundation's own contribution is only $380K; the organizer asks far more from the treasury than it contributes itself
- A one-time event produces no compounding infrastructure value — 7.8M ADA at current prices should go to work that persists
- Encourages resubmission with treasury as a minority funder and a revenue-share or repayment structure
- Yes14.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes13.9M ₳Rationale
I am voting YES on governance action 7b42570b685aa6085c8345f894a6b04df06cb6fb17f9f252cfe891ceae705ddc#0.
First, I do not see any conflict of interest. I will receive no payments, tickets, sponsored travel, or anything else for this event. I'm not even sure I'll be able to make it.
This was a very hard vote for me.
On the one hand, my consistent message with other proposals has been that we need presence, this year of all years.
On the other, the cost is extremely steep relative to what that cost could achieve in the hands of other, smaller organizations.
In the end, what convinced me was the CF's willingness to revise their proposal based on feedback, and the fact that the costs of these events is trending down over time as the operational overhead gets streamlined. Interrupting that cadence is likely to increase costs in future years.
(Apologies for the rushed justification, this is right before the deadline)
You can find a larger writeup justifying my vote here.
- Yes13.3M ₳Rationale
RCADA Rationale
RCADA votes YES on the Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore Treasury Withdrawal proposal.
This is a cautious YES.
RCADA supports this revised proposal because it is materially stronger than the earlier Cardano Summit / TOKEN2049 proposal. The Cardano Foundation has responded to community feedback by decoupling the Summit from EMURGO’s TOKEN2049 sponsorship proposal, reducing the requested budget by 22%, narrowing the event from three stages to two, and increasing the Foundation’s estimated internal resource contribution from $250,000 to $380,000.
These changes matter. RCADA has consistently raised concerns about bundled proposals, unclear accountability, high Treasury asks, and weak measurability. In this case, the revised proposal addresses several of those concerns directly. It is not perfect, but it demonstrates responsiveness to community scrutiny and a willingness to reduce scope and cost.
RCADA also recognises the strategic case for holding the Cardano Summit in Singapore immediately before TOKEN2049. Singapore is a major financial, regulatory, and digital-asset hub, and the timing provides access to an audience already concentrated around institutional finance, blockchain infrastructure, enterprise adoption, developers, investors, regulators, and media. If well executed, this positioning could help Cardano reach audiences that are difficult and expensive to attract through ecosystem-only events.
The two-day structure is also clearer than the earlier version. Ecosystem Day provides space for governance, builders, DReps, technical workshops, hackathon activity, ecosystem showcases, and community engagement. Industry Day focuses on enterprise, institutional, regulatory, DeFi, stablecoin, interoperability, identity, AI, and real-world adoption themes. RCADA sees value in this split because it preserves community participation while also targeting external adoption audiences.
The proposal also includes a more useful KPI framework than many event proposals. The Foundation is targeting 1,200 attendees, 700 senior executives and decision makers, 250 enterprise marketing-qualified leads, 50 strategic meetings within 45 days post-event, 10 live demos or technical workshops, 200 developer participants, and 30 hackathon submissions or applications. These targets do not guarantee impact, but they provide a clearer basis for post-event accountability than attendance numbers alone.
That said, RCADA’s support should not be interpreted as blanket approval for large recurring event funding from the Treasury.
Even after the reduction, this remains a significant request: ₳7,800,000, based on a $1,950,000 budget. A two-day event must be held to a high standard when funded from the public Treasury. Brand visibility alone is not enough. The Summit should produce measurable follow-through in the form of qualified leads, strategic meetings, developer engagement, technical demonstrations, sponsor revenue, partnership opportunities, and credible post-event reporting.
RCADA also notes that stronger community support may have been achieved with a larger direct cash contribution from the Cardano Foundation, a matched-funding structure, stronger sponsor commitments before the vote, more granular milestone release, or a clearer multi-year plan for reducing recurring Treasury dependency. The proposal does deduct $313,000 in Summit 2025 revenue and states that 2026 revenue will be ring-fenced for 2027 venue deposits and early planning, which is positive, but a more explicit long-term sustainability model would strengthen future event proposals.
We also remain cautious about the front-loaded funding structure. The first milestone releases ₳6,240,000 after approval and funding of the treasury contract, while ₳1,560,000 is paid after delivery of the event. RCADA understands that major events require early deposits, vendor commitments, venue planning, and lead time, but this structure places substantial reliance on pre-delivery execution discipline. Public reporting and oversight therefore need to be especially strong.
RCADA further notes that the proposal is submitted outside the Intersect budget process due to event-planning timing constraints. We accept that large events require earlier commitments than an August or September withdrawal would allow, and the proposal explains that a delayed funding cycle could make the October 2026 event impractical. However, timing pressure should not become a routine workaround for normal budget discipline. Future event planning should aim to align more predictably with budget cycles where possible.
Overall, RCADA believes the revised Summit proposal clears the threshold for cautious support. It has improved meaningfully, is strategically timed, includes clearer KPIs, uses smart-contract-based administration and oversight, and responds to community budget concerns. However, this vote is narrow and conditional in spirit.
For these reasons, RCADA votes YES, while emphasising that future Summit or event proposals should continue improving cost-sharing, sponsor pre-commitments, post-event ROI reporting, milestone design, and long-term sustainability. The success of this proposal should ultimately be judged not by attendance or visibility alone, but by whether it creates measurable enterprise, developer, governance, and ecosystem outcomes for Cardano.
RCADA's full vote assessment can be found here: "https://brolloks.github.io/rcada-drep-votes/."
- Yes12.1M ₳Rationale
We find the outputs and strategic objectives of this proposal beneficial to the Cardano ecosystem.
We acknowledge concerns regarding the size of the treasury withdrawal; however, we recognize that the revised proposal substantially reduces costs while preserving the strategic intent and operational quality of the Summit.
We believe the proposal aligns with Cardano’s broader adoption strategy by positioning the ecosystem in a major global financial and blockchain hub at a critical time for institutional engagement, interoperability, tokenization, stablecoins, AI infrastructure, and enterprise adoption.
We further appreciate:
a. the measurable KPI framework,
b. milestone-based treasury disbursement,
c. public accountability dashboards,
d. independent oversight mechanisms, and
e. the use of audited smart contract infrastructure for treasury administration.In our assessment, the proposal represents a strategically aligned ecosystem growth initiative with sufficient transparency and accountability measures to justify treasury support.
- Abstain10.9M ₳No rationale
- YesChanged10.8M ₳History
Earlier votes
No2mo agoSuperseded
- Yes10.4M ₳Rationale
I voted NO on the TOKEN2049 Title Sponsorship top-up and YES on the Cardano Summit 2026 proposal.
The TOKEN2049 top-up is primarily an incremental spend on premium visibility - a larger booth, a keynote slot, additional branding, media introductions and related event optics. I do not think the marginal return on that extra spend is clear enough.
The Cardano Summit is different. It is a Cardano controlled platform with a dedicated agenda and a clearer structure for converting attention into meaningful ecosystem outcomes. The revised Summit proposal is no longer tied to the TOKEN2049 sponsorship proposal and has been reduced by 22% while preserving the core two day structure. It also defines more direct outcome targets, including 250 enterprise MQLs, 50 strategic meetings within 45 days, 10 live demos/workshops, 200 developer participants, and 30 hackathon submissions/applications.
Just as importantly, prior Summits provide evidence that this format has already produced real value.
The official Cardano Summit 2025 results state that the event brought 1,460 in person attendees and 26,000 online viewers, while also recording strong participation from enterprises including Volvo, Wurth Group, Mastercard and many more. The same official recap reports that the Layer Up hackathon attracted 134 developers from 92 teams, resulting in 14 submitted projects.
It has acted as a meeting point for enterprise engagement and developer onboarding. There are also concrete examples from the ecosystem.
Example - At the 2022 Lausanne Summit, I presented on data compliance, privacy, security and GDPR. This speech was right before Charles' announcement of Midnight
At the 2025 Berlin Summit, the official agenda included "Iagon & Würth Group: Enterprise Adoption -A Cardano Case Study." This was a direct example of a real enterprise use case being showcased through the Cardano Summit format.
The Summit gives Cardano:
- a platform it controls
- an agenda aligned to its priorities
- a structured place for builders and enterprises to meet
- a more direct path from visibility to follow-up and adoption
That is why I was comfortable supporting the Summit, while not supporting the premium TOKEN2049 top-up
- Yes9.6M ₳No rationale
- No9.2M ₳No rationale
- Abstain8.8M ₳Rationale
私はこの提案を棄権します。Cardano Summitが、コミュニティ、開発者、DRep、エコシステム関係者が集まり、ガバナンス議論やネットワーキング、技術共有を行う場として一定の価値を持つことは理解しています。また、コミュニティからのフィードバックを受けて予算削減や構成見直しを行った点についても評価しています。一方で、私は現在、より多くの外部ユーザー、企業、機関投資家、他チェーン関係者などへの新規露出や流入につながる施策を重視しています。その観点から見ると、本提案については慎重に判断したいと考えています。そのため、本提案には一定の意義を感じつつも、今回は棄権します。\n\nI abstain from this proposal. I understand that the Cardano Summit has value as a place for the community, developers, DReps, and ecosystem participants to gather for governance discussions, networking, and technical exchange. I also appreciate that the proposal was revised following community feedback, including budget reductions and scope adjustments. At the same time, I currently place greater importance on initiatives that can generate broader external exposure and attract new users, enterprises, institutional participants, and stakeholders from other blockchain ecosystems. From that perspective, I believe this proposal should be considered carefully. While I recognize the value of this proposal, I have chosen to abstain at this time.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- NoRevoted7.6M ₳Rationale
Having a Cardano Summit may be important, but trust in the Foundation is a bigger issue for me. I don't want to be in a position to second guess what the foundation presents to DReps. Unfortunately, I have to second guess now.
In the previous vote on the Cardano Summit I welcomed the proposal from the CF and Emurgo and voted No - one of the reasons was that the CF moved away from its own plan for achieving Cardano Summit sustainability that helped it get funding for the previous Cardano Summit. To me, this represents a breach of trust.
My point is that if the CF’s mandate is, broadly speaking, to support institutional adoption, Cardano usage and long-term sustainability, then this proposal undermines the very credibility the CF needs to perform that role.
It is difficult to reconcile the CF’s role as a credible institutional partner with its inability to maintain its own sustainability plan for a controlled event such as the Summit for even one year. Plans can change, and mistakes can happen. Not holding a Summit is not the end of the world.
I could understand a mistake. However, the Cardano Foundation tweeted the following on April 14, 2026: "We must be clear that there will be no modified Cardano Summit proposal. There simply isn't time on the calendar to reengineer an event of this size." That was just two weeks ago.
I am losing trust in the CF as a body that is able to present reliable and consistent information in support of its proposals. The tweet could reasonably be read as putting pressure on undecided DReps to vote YES by implying that there would otherwise be no Summit in 2026.
Finally, the proposal contains a revenue rollover mechanism, but not a credible, measurable path to Summit self-sustainability or reduced Treasury dependence. In my view, the sustainability of the Summit should be resolved before the Treasury is asked to fund it again. The long-term issue is much more important to me than holding the Cardano Summit in 2026.
To me, the CF appears to be transferring the consequences of an overextended event strategy to the Treasury. I cannot vote in good faith for this as I do not have sufficient confidence in the proposal, its assumptions, or its long-term funding model.
Please note that this vote does not reflect on all CF activities. It is specifically aimed at this proposal and the context in which it is being proposed.Earlier votes
No2mo agoSuperseded
The Cardano Foundation needs to serve as a root of trust in its day-to-day work, both for the ecosystem and for future partners.
A root of trust.Having a Cardano Summit may be important, but trust in the Foundation is a bigger issue for me. I don't want to be in a position to second guess what the foundation presents to DReps. Unfortunately, I have to second guess now.
In the previous vote on the Cardano Summit I welcomed the proposal from the CF and Emurgo and voted No - one of the reasons was that the CF moved away from its own plan for achieving Cardano Summit sustainability that helped it get funding for the previous Cardano Summit.To me, this represents a breach of trust.
My point is that if the CF’s mandate is, broadly speaking, to support institutional adoption, Cardano usage and long-term sustainability, then this proposal undermines the very credibility the CF needs to perform that role.
It is difficult to reconcile the CF’s role as a credible institutional partner with its inability to maintain its own sustainability plan for a controlled event such as the Summit for even one year. Plans can change, and mistakes can happen. Not holding a Summit is not the end of the world.
I could understand a mistake. However, the Cardano Foundation tweeted the following on April 14, 2026: "We must be clear that there will be no modified Cardano Summit proposal. There simply isn't time on the calendar to reengineer an event of this size." That was just two weeks ago.
I am losing trust in the CF as a body that is able to present reliable and consistent information in support of its proposals. The tweet could reasonably be read as putting pressure on undecided DReps to vote YES by implying that there would otherwise be no Summit in 2026.
Finally, the proposal contains a revenue rollover mechanism, but not a credible, measurable path to Summit self-sustainability or reduced Treasury dependence. In my view, the sustainability of the Summit should be resolved before the Treasury is asked to fund it again. The long-term issue is much more important to me than holding the Cardano Summit in 2026.
To me, the CF appears to be transferring the consequences of an overextended event strategy to the Treasury. I cannot vote in good faith for this as I do not have sufficient confidence in the proposal, its assumptions, or its long-term funding model.
Please note that this vote does not reflect on all CF activities. It is specifically aimed at this proposal and the context in which it is being proposed.
- Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- No7.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
Here’s a cleaner, more structured version that keeps your meaning and tone:
I am voting Yes.
The proposal being separated from TOKEN2049 addresses one of my main concerns from the prior version. The more focused scope, along with a modest reduction in total cost and a leaner event structure, moves this in a better direction.
I still believe there is opportunity cost here. My original concerns around pipeline, conversion, and post-event outcomes are not fully satisfied, but I’m also not sure they realistically can be at this stage. This is still partly an awareness and engagement effort, and the real test will come after the event.
I don’t know that the Cardano Foundation can fully predict what this converts into, but I do think they understand where Cardano needs to be represented and who the target audience is. Given the location, timing, strategic opportunity, and Cardano’s position as an L1 that needs to show up in these conversations, I view this as an acceptable proposal and cost.
That said, support here should not be interpreted as a blank check for future Summits. We need to take a hard look at the results in the months after the event and evaluate what actually came from it. Future Summit proposals should be benchmarked against the outcomes of this one. - Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.5M ₳No rationale
- Abstain5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
Yes as the team listened to the community and submitted a revised treasury withdrawal
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
STORM Partners votes YES on the Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore proposal.
We appreciate that the Cardano Foundation revised the proposal in response to community feedback. Decoupling the Summit from the TOKEN2049 sponsorship, reducing the budget by 22%, narrowing the scope, and increasing the Foundation’s internal contribution are all positive signs. This shows that treasury governance can work as an iterative process where DReps, proposers, and the community challenge assumptions and improve proposals before final voting.
We also see strategic value in hosting the Summit in Singapore, especially around TOKEN2049. If Cardano wants to compete for institutional attention, liquidity, enterprise integrations, and regional adoption in Asia, it needs credible presence in the places where those conversations already happen. The proposal’s KPIs around enterprise leads, strategic meetings, developer participation, demos, and media reach provide a reasonable basis for post-event accountability.
Our support comes with expectations. The Summit should showcase the strongest Cardano-native and Cardano-adjacent products, integrations, and adoption stories, including projects with real market traction and credible user-facing outcomes. It should not become a narrow institutional showcase or a venue for low-impact promotion. We expect transparent reporting after the event, including budget reconciliation, KPI performance, sponsor revenue, and concrete follow-up outcomes.
- Yes4.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.7M ₳Rationale
Of the 3 event proposals, this is the only one I am willing to for in favor of.
- No4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳Rationale
I appreciate the decision to decouple this proposal from Token2049. Having rejected EMURGO’s initiative, I will support the Cardano Foundation’s Cardano Summit in Singapore. I believe it delivers greater value between the two events and fully endorse the significant cost reduction.
- Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.1M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança "Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore" (gov_action10dp9wzmgt2nqshyrghufff4sfhcxedhmzluly5k0azguatnsthwqqs84cjf), pois entendemos que, embora o valor solicitado seja relevante e deva ser analisado com responsabilidade, a versão revisada demonstra um esforço concreto de redução de custos, com corte de 22% no orçamento, maior contribuição interna da Cardano Foundation e um escopo mais enxuto, sem abandonar a ambição estratégica do evento. O Cardano Summit 2026 em Singapura representa uma oportunidade importante para posicionar a Cardano além do público de varejo cripto. A escolha do local e do momento busca colocar o ecossistema diante de instituições financeiras, empresas, reguladores, investidores, construtores e parceiros estratégicos capazes de acelerar adoção real, integrações comerciais e desenvolvimento de novos casos de uso. Mais do que um evento comunitário, a proposta mira um público com potencial de gerar relacionamentos qualificados, oportunidades institucionais e impacto de longo prazo para o ecossistema. Por esses motivos, entendemos que o investimento, apesar de expressivo, pode ser justificado pela combinação de visibilidade global, foco em adoção institucional, fortalecimento dos construtores e mecanismos de prestação de contas previstos na proposta. O sucesso da Cardano nos próximos anos dependerá não apenas da qualidade de sua tecnologia, mas também da capacidade de apresentá-la aos atores certos, nos lugares certos e no momento certo.
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action "Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore" (gov_action10dp9wzmgt2nqshyrghufff4sfhcxedhmzluly5k0azguatnsthwqqs84cjf), because we understand that, although the requested amount is significant and must be assessed responsibly, the revised version demonstrates a concrete effort to reduce costs, including a 22% budget reduction, a greater internal contribution from the Cardano Foundation, and a leaner scope without abandoning the event’s strategic ambition. The Cardano Summit 2026 in Singapore represents an important opportunity to position Cardano beyond the crypto retail audience. The choice of location and timing seeks to place the ecosystem in front of financial institutions, companies, regulators, investors, builders, and strategic partners capable of accelerating real adoption, commercial integrations, and the development of new use cases. Rather than being merely a community event, the proposal targets an audience with the potential to generate qualified relationships, institutional opportunities, and long-term impact for the ecosystem. For these reasons, we believe that the investment, despite being substantial, can be justified by the combination of global visibility, focus on institutional adoption, support for builders, and accountability mechanisms included in the proposal. Cardano’s success in the coming years will depend not only on the quality of its technology, but also on the ability to present that technology to the right stakeholders, in the right places, and at the right time. - No3.8M ₳Rationale
We've been spending too much and I don't believe this will move the needle.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I do not currently view this as a high-priority treasury allocation relative to other ecosystem needs.
I understand the strategic rationale for maintaining a flagship Cardano summit presence, particularly in Singapore given its regional positioning, business environment, and relevance within the broader digital asset industry. Large ecosystem events can provide real value through coordination, relationship-building, visibility, and institutional signaling.
However, I believe treasury governance should distinguish carefully between strategically useful ecosystem activity and genuinely critical public infrastructure.
At the current stage of ecosystem development, Cardano’s more immediate bottlenecks remain concentrated around liquidity, application density, interoperability, developer adoption, and sustainable economic activity. A large conference may indirectly support some of those goals, but it does not address them directly in the way protocol, tooling, or infrastructure investments potentially can.
I am also cautious about normalizing ongoing treasury support for large ecosystem events because conference spending is inherently difficult to evaluate rigorously. Attribution of ecosystem growth, partnerships, or adoption to event activity is often speculative, and event proposals can easily drift toward weak accountability, prestige spending, and soft-power concentration around ecosystem institutions.
Additionally, flagship summits inevitably shape ecosystem narratives, visibility, and access structures, which makes them governance-relevant beyond simple event organization.
This does not mean the summit lacks value. It likely does provide ecosystem benefits. But treasury capital is finite, and I am not currently convinced this proposal represents sufficiently urgent or strategically indispensable infrastructure relative to other competing priorities.
- Abstain3.7M ₳No rationale
- No3.1M ₳Rationale
Despite the revisions to this proposal, I still have to vote no as the proposal is currently structured.
Last year's Cardano Summit was funded with the express distinction from the Cardano Foundation that the funding supplied and the extortion-level pricing for vendors and attendees was to make the Cardano Summit self-sufficient.
Instead, we still have the Cardano Foundation asking for more money this year, and no disclosure of what happened to make the event unsustainable. As far as I can tell, the CF has no intention to make the Cardano Summit self-sustainable now or in the future.
Considering the very tight NCL budget room left for 2026, I don't see the value in the community funding the Cardano Summit again this year.
Instead, I expect the Cardano Foundation to step up and fund the summit using genesis ADA if this is something they want to have happen this year.
Take responsibility for what happened last year, and actually pay your fair share into building our our ecosystem. Exploiting the treasury every chance you get cannot continue.
- Yes3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Abstain2.8M ₳No rationale
- No2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
この提案は、Cardano Summit 2026をシンガポールで開催し、TOKEN2049直前の機関投資家・企業・規制関係者・開発者が集まる環境を活用する、戦略的意義の高い提案です。前回案から22%削減され、EMURGO提案とも切り離された点は、コミュニティの懸念に応えた改善として評価します。Cardanoが研究・技術中心のチェーンから、DeFi、RWA、stablecoin、AI、identityを含む実需市場へ進むうえで、Asiaの金融ハブで存在感を示すことには大きな意味があります。 本提案では、Enterprise MQL、戦略会議、技術デモ、開発者参加、ハッカソン提出数などのKPIが設定されており、単なる参加者数ではなく、採用導線を測ろうとしている点も評価できます。一方で、初回マイルストーンが80%前払いである点、KPIがまだ露出・参加者数・初期接点に寄っており、実装成果への接続が十分に明確ではない点は改善が必要です。 Treasury支出としての成果をより明確にするため、イベント後にはPoC（本格導入前の小規模な実証実験）、MOU（協力検討を文書化する覚書）、技術統合候補、DeFi・流動性関連の継続商談、ハッカソン後の開発継続率なども、可能な範囲で追跡・報告されることを期待します。これにより、Summitが単なる広報イベントではなく、Cardano上の実装・採用にどのように接続したかを、コミュニティがより具体的に評価できると考えます。 また、Cardano Foundationの自己資金力を踏まえると、今後はCF負担比率、収益のTreasury還元、成果連動型支払いをより明確にすべきです。以上を踏まえ、今回は戦略的価値を重視して賛成しますが、次回以降はより厳格な成果指標と資金配分設計を求めます
This proposal has strong strategic value because it brings Cardano Summit 2026 to Singapore and positions Cardano immediately before TOKEN2049, where institutional investors, enterprises, regulators, and developers will already be gathered. I also appreciate that the revised proposal reduces the budget by 22% and separates it from EMURGO’s TOKEN2049 sponsorship proposal, responding to community concerns. As Cardano moves from a research- and technology-focused chain toward real-world markets such as DeFi, RWA, stablecoins, AI, and identity, having a strong presence in Asia’s financial hub is meaningful.
The proposal also includes KPIs such as Enterprise MQLs, strategic meetings, technical demos, developer participation, and hackathon submissions. This is positive because it tries to measure adoption pathways, not only attendance. However, the first milestone releases 80% of the funds upfront, and the KPIs still lean toward visibility, attendance, and early-stage contacts. The connection to concrete implementation outcomes could be clearer.
To better evaluate the impact of Treasury spending, I would like to see post-event reporting, where possible, on additional outcome-oriented indicators such as Proofs of Concept, Memoranda of Understanding, technical integration opportunities, DeFi or liquidity-related follow-ups, and developer retention after the hackathon. These would help the community understand how the Summit connects to real implementation and adoption on Cardano, rather than only serving as a branding event.
Given the Cardano Foundation’s own financial capacity, future proposals should also clarify the CF funding share, possible revenue return to the Treasury, and more outcome-based milestone payments. Based on the strategic value of this event, I support this proposal, while asking for stricter outcome metrics and funding design in future proposals.
- Yes2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
thanks for revising
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- No2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳Rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳Rationale
I am voting YES on the Revised Cardano Summit 2026 Singapore proposal because I believe Cardano needs credible external visibility, ecosystem coordination and real-world adoption efforts alongside protocol and infrastructure development.
Importantly, this revised proposal responded constructively to community feedback. The budget was reduced materially, the Summit was decoupled from TOKEN2049, and the proposal now includes clearer scope, measurable KPIs and a more focused delivery approach.
While I remain mindful of treasury discipline and current NCL constraints, I also believe Cardano cannot rely solely on technical excellence to grow. Developer engagement, enterprise visibility, institutional networking and ecosystem showcase events all play a role in long-term adoption and ecosystem expansion when executed responsibly.
I recognise the concerns around event ROI and large ecosystem spending. Those concerns are valid, and future treasury-funded events should continue moving toward stronger accountability, measurable outcomes and efficient budgeting.
However, on balance, I believe the revised proposal represents a significantly improved and more reasonable approach compared with the original version, and I believe supporting a well-scoped flagship ecosystem event is aligned with Cardano’s broader growth and adoption goals.
This vote aligns with my broader DRep philosophy of supporting:
1 sustainable ecosystem growth,
2 external adoption and visibility,
3 developer and enterprise engagement,
4 responsible treasury stewardship,
5 and long-term Cardano ecosystem resilience. - Yes2M ₳No rationale