Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development
179 DReps voted · 71 with a rationale · 6 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes105.8K ₳No rationale
- No89.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes65.7K ₳Rationale
This is the core system of governance. Voting it is "unavoidable" even if imperfect.
- Yes55.9K ₳Rationale
for lack of better options: yes. and yes for community collab.
next year I will vote no on this.yes
- Yes53K ₳Rationale
I agree to proceed the treasury withdrawal to provide the needed funding for Cardano Govtool operation and maintenance.
- Yes48.6K ₳Rationale
it helps
- Yes45.2K ₳No rationale
- Yes37.9K ₳No rationale
- Yes29.3K ₳Rationale
This Gov tool should be integrated into every wallet and maybe even have a small bonus ADA allocated to those that do vote. Voting is so important, its like people need to turn up to the polls and people need to become members and use their voting power.
- Yes26.7K ₳Rationale
The current budget is about 150k overestimated as the current price of ADA is estimated at 0.67 and thus, the amount asked for is about 770k, not 920k. Though there is no breakdown about how this money will be spent over the next 12 months besides a vague description, gov.tools is an essential tool to make ADA a decentralized government. I vote for this proposal out of necessity.
I believe the gov.tools team is most likely irresponsible with the money the community entrusts to them and lacks transparency and can't adequately demonstrate their worth, but we have no other option at this time.
It is pathetic we as a community are being held hostage by such a proposal. Tempo.vote should have been afforded more care by Catalyst at the very least and Intersect should learn what it means to have multiple overlapping forms of governance as well as historical precedent. However, we all know that Intersect, using the same leadership that failed in CCV's, is simply a joke at this time.
- Yes25.7K ₳No rationale
- Yes15.2K ₳No rationale
- No12K ₳No rationale
- Yes10.6K ₳Rationale
I like this proposal.
- Abstain8.1K ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted6.7K ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
Yes9mo agoSuperseded
- Yes4.8K ₳No rationale
- Yes3.6K ₳No rationale
- No2.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes1.2K ₳Rationale
I’m voting YES on this GovTool treasury withdrawal. This proposal addresses some of the most critical needs for Cardano governance today. What stands out most is the Key Features and Roadmap: supporting group DReps, showing DRep and Governance Action voting history, allowing multiple votes per transaction, integrating CoSponsor for crowdfunding deposits, expanding APIs, and optimizing infrastructure. These improvements make governance more transparent, accessible, and efficient for the entire community.
The Governance & Oversight structure is also excellent — administration via Intersect’s smart contracts with checks from the Oversight Committee and a public dashboard for on-chain auditing ensures accountability, reduces risk of mismanagement, and strengthens trust.
With contributions coordinated through the GovTool Consortium — including LidoNation, ByronNetwork, WeDeliver, and Dquadrant — this proposal ensures that the platform remains community-led, open-source, and sustainable. The rationale is clear: prevent fragmentation, maintain a neutral platform, and safeguard the long-term health of Cardano’s on-chain governance ecosystem.
For all these reasons, I fully support this withdrawal. - Yes684.4 ₳No rationale
- Yes682 ₳No rationale
- Abstain335.3 ₳No rationale
- Yes329.6 ₳No rationale
- No17.8 ₳No rationale
- No0 ₳No rationale
- Yes0 ₳No rationale
- Yes0 ₳No rationale
- Abstain0 ₳No rationale