Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarc...
143 DReps voted · 48 with a rationale · 3 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes575M ₳Rationale
Yoroi DRep votes YES on Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch, Plinth and Clb. The Cardano community has spoken clearly through the Hydra off-chain voting platform, and Yoroi is committed to honouring that voice.
- Honouring the Community Mandate: With a supermajority of over 67% in the off-chain governance process, this proposal carries a strong and unambiguous signal of community support. Yoroi votes Yes in alignment with that collective decision.
- Yes384.3M ₳Rationale
Please check the following link for the reasons for the vote.（投票理由は次のページを参照してください。)
- Abstain331.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes299.7M ₳Rationale
EMURGO as a DRep votes YES on Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch, Plinth and Clb, with rationale outlined below.
This proposal successfully completed the off-chain community governance process on the Hydra voting platform, crossing the required 67% approval threshold. EMURGO respects the legitimacy of this community-led process and votes YES in recognition of the mandate that the Cardano community has clearly expressed. For these reasons, EMURGO votes yes.
- Yes258.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes219.4M ₳Rationale
We vote on Intersect budget items as we did on Ekklesia.
- No175.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes171.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes123.7M ₳Rationale
This document includes the Cardano Foundation’s voting decisions and individual voting rationales for the 11 Treasury Withdrawal governance actions submitted following the Intersect-facilitated budget process.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
Our approach is designed to ensure both transparency and efficiency, applying a consistent evaluation framework (see the “Cardano Foundation Voting Decisions for the 2026 Intersect Budget Process”) to each proposal and presenting our reasoning in a single, comprehensive document.
No material changes have been made to the individual proposals since the budget proposals were approved in Hydra Voting, therefore our votes on these withdrawals reflect our original assessment and vote. Our voting decisions on the 11 treasury withdrawals are made available in the table below.
Fund administration clarity is an important consideration for our voting decisions. Our expectation is that expect Intersect, as administrator, will manage funds diligently, provide public transparency on contracts, and ensure robust oversight, holding recipients accountable for deliverables.
Conclusion
The Cardano Foundation’s votes on these 11 treasury withdrawal governance actions are the direct execution of a single, comprehensive review process that began during the Hydra Voting phase. Although we present one aggregate rationale for efficiency, each proposal and governance action was individually assessed against a consistent framework anchored in our publicly stated principles.
Voting Record
Governance Action ID Title Vote Rationale gov_action1k02...cw2nc5 Withdraw 3,961,538 ada for Bringing Real-World Payments to Cardano with Wirex YES The Wirex proposal credibly contributes to adoption and utility because the deliverables provide card-based financial services and open payment rails linked to on-chain balances. The proposal is expected to expand real-world payment utility and leverage Wirex's established scale to create a plausible path toward increased ecosystem usage to justify treasury investment. The budget justification would benefit from establishing explicit Cardano-specific user migration volumes, ADA spending targets, and a delineation of open-source components. However, the team demonstrates a strong operational history and extensive multi-jurisdictional transaction experience. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...tttste Withdraw 540,750 ada for by TxPipe Dolos: Maintaining Cardano's Lightweight Data Node, Year 2 YES The Dolos by TxPipe proposal credibly contributes to infrastructure and research excellence because the deliverables target a mature, non-Haskell alternative node implementation that directly decentralizes data access. The proposal is expected to drive sustained protocol-level engagement and support long-term network resilience by safeguarding critical node diversity. Furthermore, the team has a proven track record of continuous infrastructure delivery and verifiable software releases across prior cycles, and the budget is appropriately justified given a clean cost structure for a part-time maintainer that features a transparent return-to-treasury clause for unused contingency reserves. However, the proposal would benefit from less generic milestone definitions that commit to specific protocol-version readiness for upcoming hard forks and more defined deliverables to support its speculative AI-integration scope. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...hyg4hw Withdraw 1,310,960 ada for Hardware Wallet Maintenance 2026 NO The Hardware Wallet Maintenance 2026 proposal has potential to contribute to security, continuity, and ecosystem access as the deliverables target a critical access layer to ensure ongoing hardware wallet compatibility for ADA holders. However, the budget is not appropriately justified and compared to previous funding cycles for similar scopes seems too high. Additionally, the project presents substantial execution and accountability risks, evidenced by incomplete milestones and significant delivery delays in the 2025 cycle, alongside a repository changelog that suggests an undocumented complete rewrite rather than routine maintenance. Without explicit clarifications regarding vendor responsibilities, itemized cost increases, and structured milestone definitions managed via clear, centralized ecosystem demand, the current proposal lacks the necessary transparency for public funding. Based on this, CF votes No. gov_action1k02...ypfkyr Withdraw 1,193,000 ada for Intersect Technical Steering Committee Support YES IntersectTSC credibly contributes to the development of Cardano governance and supports infrastructure and research excellence. The proposed milestones strongly align with the strategic priorities and 'Our Cardano' principles by funding critical operations for the Parameter Committee, CIP Editors, and Hard Fork Working Group. The proposal is expected to generate meaningful on-chain activity through direct network usage, transaction volume, governance participation, and enhanced by WP1 expert event engagements. The team has a proven track record of delivering ecosystem grants and meaningful outcomes, as evidenced by their coordination of the Plomin and Chang hard forks. The budget is appropriately justified given the phased milestone structure with clearly defined acceptance criteria and provisions for independent oversight, including independent third-party audit verification via Appold and an absolute return-to-treasury policy for all unspent capital. However, it is recommended that WP1 track active delivery metrics rather than event attendance, and mandate the publication of post-event reports to turn travel into a strategic intelligence asset, while WP3 must enforce its promised total independent recusal framework. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...x6wlxf Withdraw 25,400,000 ada for Intersect: Governance coordination and technical stewardship for the Cardano ecosystem ABSTAIN This Intersect proposal credibly contributes to open governance coordination, technical stewardship, and ecosystem outreach as the deliverables successfully support the off-chain coordination model outlined in the Cardano 2030 Strategy. However, the immediate impact of its 2026 technical budget to on-chain network growth remains obscured by substantial operational ambiguities. This is because its technical focus risks introducing unnecessary parallel management layers rather than directly driving clean, high-impact technical utility. Furthermore, while the organization has demonstrated experience managing an evolving decentralized landscape over the past two years, the total requested budget of 25,400,000 ADA is not appropriately justified given a lack of granular, itemized baseline financial accounting and clear 2025 actual expenditure statements to verify true value-for-money. Additionally, extensive work packages within the proposal heavily overlap with core software maintenance, repository stewardship, and infrastructure monitoring solutions already maintained by the ecosystem, while the current committee framework introduces administrative overheads that require swift structural streamlining to prioritize tangible, democratic, and measurable outcomes. Based on this, CF votes Abstain. gov_action1k02...4l0u4y Withdraw 3,810,423 ada for Mithril Protocol YES The Mithril Protocol proposal credibly contributes to infrastructure, scalability, and research excellence by providing critical light-client verification models, Layer 2 anchoring primitives, and SNARK-based certificate compression frameworks. The proposal is expected to drive long-term protocol maintainability, cross-chain interoperability, and future-proof network resilience, thereby justifying treasury investment. Furthermore, the team has a proven track record of peer-reviewed engineering delivery and technical execution, and the budget is appropriately justified, as the requested funding is consistent with the strategic importance of the core infrastructure tracks. However, the proposal would benefit from a clearer, itemized breakdown of staffing costs and full-time equivalent (FTE) allocations to address headline cost concerns, as well as a more explicit articulation of broader system impacts regarding network decentralization and production wallet integration pathways. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...fsvefn Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch and Ply YES The MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement proposal credibly contributes to infrastructure and developer experience by providing essential maintenance and ongoing enhancements for widely used developer tools. While maintenance itself is not expected to generate immediate on-chain activity, safeguarding heavily used builder infrastructure protects the ecosystem from severe disruption and ensures that future transaction volume and adoption remain sustainable. Furthermore, the team has a demonstrated track record of delivering foundational developer tools, and the budget is appropriately justified given that it represents a fairly reasonable and standard funding request for specialized repository oversight. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...64d667 Withdraw 540,750 ada for Oura by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano’s Event Pipeline YES The Oura by TxPipe proposal credibly contributes to infrastructure, developer decentralization, and ecosystem accessibility by providing essential open-source event data pipeline tooling that directly benefits a wide range of active deployments. The proposal is expected to drive sustained protocol-level engagement and protect ecosystem growth from the adverse risks of critical tool attrition to justify treasury investment. Furthermore, the team has established a reliable track record of building foundational developer solutions, and the budget is appropriately justified given that the funding request is neither excessive nor unrealistic for a dedicated maintenance resource. However, the proposal would benefit from increased clarity regarding its SLAs and explicit expectations for the full-time maintainer. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...d0ztd8 Withdraw 540,750 ada for Pallas by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano's Core Rust Libraries, Year 2 YES The Pallas by TxPipe proposal credibly contributes to infrastructure and research excellence because the deliverables target core, low-level building blocks that directly support critical downstream network dependencies like Amaru. The proposal is expected to drive sustained protocol-level engagement and safeguard foundational infrastructure that justifies treasury investment. Furthermore, the team has demonstrated the necessary expertise to maintain the solution, and the budget is appropriately justified given the essential utility and ongoing ecosystem reliance on the repository. However, the proposal would benefit from clearer resource guarantees to ensure the allocated developer actively manages and maintains the codebase. Based on this, CF votes Yes. gov_action1k02...72rg72 Withdraw 1,684,050 ada for Tx3 by TxPipe: Open API Layer for Cardano's dApp Protocols ABSTAIN The Tx3 by TxPipe proposal has potential to contribute to adoption, utility, and ecosystem growth as the deliverables target a standardized open interface layer, multi-language SDKs, and agent-facing tools designed to make decentralized protocols discoverable and composable. While this proposal has potential to drive future protocol-level engagement and enhance developer experiences, its immediate on-chain impact remains prospective rather than proven. Although the team has demonstrated a credible foundation with active public repositories and strong strategic alignment, the budget is not appropriately justified given an overly broad 12-month scope backed by a thin financial breakdown. Additionally, the proposal lacks crucial technical and governance evidence, including a specific protocol candidate list, detailed FTE allocations, cloud sizing parameters, explicit SLA assumptions, and concrete acceptance criteria. Based on this, CF votes Abstain. gov_action1k02...z9qdza Withdraw 540,750 ada for UTxO RPC by TxPipe: Maintaining Cardano’s Integration Standard, Year 2. YES The UTxO RPC by TxPipe proposal credibly contributes to ecosystem growth, infrastructure, and interoperability by providing a standardized integration surface and multi-language SDKs that systematically reduce developer friction. The proposal is expected to drive sustained protocol-level engagement by reinforcing node and client diversity across key projects like Amaru, Dingo, and the Haskell Cardano node that justifies treasury investment. Furthermore, the team has demonstrated a specialized track record as a protocol maintainer with strong public code and runtime evidence, and the budget is appropriately justified given the essential nature of shared open infrastructure. However, the proposal would benefit from increased specificity in its milestone definitions, including clearly defined maintenance SLAs, explicit mapping for version compatibility targets, and proper license file cleanup across all active repositories. Based on this, CF votes Yes. - Abstain90.6M ₳Rationale
As a DRep, I abstain from the proposal: MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch and Ply
My rationale:
Plutarch and Ply are useful pieces of Cardano smart-contract tooling. They support developers building and maintaining on-chain applications, and maintaining open-source developer infrastructure is generally a valid use of Treasury funding.
MLabs also has a relevant track record. The team has worked on these tools before, the work is visible, and previous delivery through Catalyst shows that they are capable of contributing to Cardano’s developer ecosystem.
However, I cannot vote YES on this proposal as submitted.
The issue is that the proposal does not describe the deliverables, cost structure, staffing, and accountability with enough detail for an on-chain Treasury withdrawal.
The proposal uses a broad quarterly maintenance model and lists reasonable priority areas such as critical breakages, protocol-era compatibility, bug fixes, optimizations, documentation, and developer-experience improvements. That is a sensible maintenance framework, but it is not enough for a YES vote at this budget level.
I would expect clearer information about specific quarterly deliverables, acceptance criteria, evidence of completion, the split between Plutarch and Ply work, expected FTE allocation, named maintainers or roles, hourly or monthly rates, and a more detailed cost breakdown.
This is especially important because MLabs has described similar work much better in Catalyst in the past. Their previous Catalyst proposal included concrete milestones, outputs, acceptance criteria, evidence requirements, delivery timing, and an hour-based budget breakdown.
In my view, teams asking for Treasury funding through on-chain governance and the Intersect budget process should maintain at least the same standard of transparency that they used in Catalyst.
I do not want to vote NO because the work itself is valuable and the team appears capable. But I also do not think the proposal is ready for a YES vote without better-defined deliverables, costs, staffing, and accountability.
For these reasons, I abstain.
If you'd like to support my work, consider delegating to the MANDA pool and backing me as a DRep. Your support is the only way I can get time for governance.
MANDA Pool ID:
pool1c3fjkls7d2aujud8y5xy5e0azu0ueatwn34u7jy3ql85ze3xya8My DRep ID:
drep1y2m0g4r66pyaw3p7u454wc0p4f0ygm8ueaev0mgd3tvwm7sskqwqpBuy me a beer:
https://pay.cexplorer.io/pay/c0410d5b237b6ec0 - Yes88.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes88.4M ₳Rationale
SIPO DRep votes YES, with expectations, on the treasury withdrawal of 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement — Plutarch.
Why SIPO votes Yes. Plutarch is smart-contract tooling that Cardano's on-chain developers build against. Tooling maintenance is the least visible and most compounding form of infrastructure spend.
SIPO DRep votes on this action as part of the 2026 Intersect Budget Process infrastructure batch — eleven treasury withdrawals submitted in a single transaction by Intersect on behalf of vendors, each having achieved the required 67% support threshold in the 2026 Intersect Budget Process Hydra Voting phase.
Shared basis. All eleven withdrawals share a single on-chain recipient: the 2026 Intersect Treasury Reserve Smart Contract at the script credential stake1784sdxt6jjennmstphgdu7l7c2scf5d02a6cve2dgn5s2kq5u3j9v, built on the Sundae Labs treasury-contracts framework. Disbursement is milestone-gated through a Project-Specific Smart Contract; authorization requires a quorum spanning Intersect admins, Intersect leadership and independent trusted entities; an Oversight Committee of six external parties — Sundae Labs, Cardano Foundation, Dquadrant, NMKR, Sundial and Eternl — independently verifies key administrative actions using on-chain logic; the contracts cannot be staked with an SPO and are delegated to the auto-abstain DRep; and a public dashboard lets the community audit the flow. This is the strongest fund-control class SIPO recognizes, and the same structure SIPO has already supported on Cardano Critical Integrations V2, Cardano Vision 2026, IO Hydra and Tweag Core Cardano Infrastructure. SIPO voted Yes on the Cardano Budget Process Framework and holds that treasury allocation should converge and mature through that route; having supported the route, SIPO does not reject its outputs absent a specific defect. This withdrawal complies with the 350M Net Change Limit covering Epochs 613 to 713 and with guardrail TREASURY-02a.
Expectations attached to this Yes. (1) Milestone-level reporting through the TRSC and PSSC of what was disbursed, to whom, and against which deliverable, surfaced on the public dashboard. (2) Continued open-source release of the funded work, and a clear statement of which work is baseline maintenance versus new development. (3) Continued independence of the Oversight Committee, and transparent tracking of cumulative treasury receipts by the recipient and by Intersect. (4) Where scope could overlap with other funded efforts, articulation at ecosystem level of the boundary, so that scope does not silently duplicate.
This vote is SIPO DRep's recorded position.
SIPO DRep として、MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement — Plutarch（1,162,746 ada）のトレジャリー引き出しに、期待事項付きで賛成（YES）を投じます。
SIPO が賛成する理由。Plutarch は、Cardano のオンチェーン開発者が依拠するスマートコントラクト・ツールです。ツールの保守は、最も目立たず、そして最も複利で効くインフラ支出です。
SIPO DRep は、本アクションを 2026 Intersect Budget Process インフラ・バッチ（Intersect が各 vendor を代表して単一トランザクションで提出した 11 件のトレジャリー引き出し。いずれも 2026 Intersect Budget Process の Hydra Voting フェーズで必要な 67% の支持閾値を達成）の一部として評価しました。
共通の根拠。11 件すべてが単一のオンチェーン受領先を共有します: script credential stake1784sdxt6jjennmstphgdu7l7c2scf5d02a6cve2dgn5s2kq5u3j9v の 2026 Intersect Treasury Reserve Smart Contract（Sundae Labs の treasury-contracts フレームワーク）です。払い出しは Project-Specific Smart Contract を通じてマイルストーンでゲートされ、承認には Intersect の admin・leadership・独立した trusted entity にまたがる定足数を要します。6 社の外部 Oversight Committee（Sundae Labs・Cardano Foundation・Dquadrant・NMKR・Sundial・Eternl）がオンチェーンロジックで主要な管理アクションを独立検証します。コントラクトは SPO にステークできず auto-abstain DRep に委任され、公開ダッシュボードでコミュニティが資金の流れを監査できます。これは SIPO が認める最強クラスの fund-control であり、SIPO が既に支持した Cardano Critical Integrations V2・Cardano Vision 2026・IO Hydra・Tweag Core Cardano Infrastructure と同一の構造です。SIPO は Cardano Budget Process Framework に賛成しており、トレジャリー配分はこのルートで収斂・成熟すべきだと考えます。ルートを支持した以上、特段の瑕疵がない限りその産物を拒みません。本引き出しは Epoch 613〜713 を対象とする 350M Net Change Limit および guardrail TREASURY-02a に準拠しています。
本賛成に付す期待事項。(1) TRSC / PSSC を通じて、何が・誰に・どの成果物に対して払い出されたかをマイルストーン単位で報告し、公開ダッシュボードに反映すること。(2) 資金提供された成果のオープンソース公開を継続し、どこまでが baseline の保守で、どこからが新規開発かを明示すること。(3) Oversight Committee の独立性を維持し、受領者および Intersect の累計トレジャリー受領額を透明に追跡すること。(4) 他の資金提供済の取り組みとスコープが重複しうる場合、その境界をエコシステムレベルで明確化し、暗黙裡に重複しないようにすること。
本投票は SIPO DRep の記録上の立場表明です。
- Yes85M ₳Rationale
This seems like a comparatively small price tag for such a well known contribution to the ecosystem's language diversity.
- Yes75.9M ₳Rationale
I support this proposal because Plutarch and Ply are important open-source tools for Cardano smart contract development and are already used by multiple development teams across the ecosystem.
This proposal focuses on maintaining compatibility with protocol upgrades, fixing bugs, improving reliability, and enhancing developer experience rather than funding speculative new features. Maintaining these tools helps reduce migration risk and supports the long-term stability of Cardano's application layer.
I would, however, encourage continued transparency through measurable progress reporting, adoption metrics, and clear maintenance outcomes throughout the funding period.
Overall, I believe this proposal represents a worthwhile investment in Cardano's open-source developer infrastructure, and I vote Yes.
PlutarchおよびPlyは、Cardanoにおけるスマートコントラクト開発を支える重要なオープンソースツールであり、多くの開発チームが実際に利用している実績があります。
本提案は、新規機能開発よりも、プロトコル更新への対応、互換性維持、バグ修正、ドキュメント整備といった継続的な保守を目的としており、Cardanoの開発基盤を支える公共性の高い投資であると評価します。
一方で、今後は進捗状況や利用状況、成果指標について継続的かつ透明性の高い報告を期待します。また、長期的な持続可能性についても引き続き注視したいと考えます。
総合的に見て、Cardanoのスマートコントラクト開発基盤を維持・強化する価値のある提案であると判断し、賛成します。
- Abstain74.6M ₳No rationale
- Abstain73.6M ₳Rationale
I am voting ABSTAIN on the MLabs Core Tool Maintenance and Enhancement treasury withdrawal for Plutarch and Ply. Since this has already been ratified, I will not stand in the way of the community vote.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I am voting ABSTAIN on the MLabs Core Tool Maintenance and Enhancement treasury withdrawal for Plutarch and Ply. Since this has already been ratified, I will not stand in the way of the community vote. However, I believe the budget ask for this proposal is too high. I actually favored the Encrypted Programmable Tokens with TFHE proposal, as I believe that innovation could have unlocked some really unique use cases on Cardano, but unfortunately that did not make it through the budget process.
- Yes69.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes62.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes53.8M ₳Rationale
I'm voting Yes on the MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch and Ply proposal.
I've consistently held that treasury funds should go first to infrastructure that is specific to Cardano and that the market won't replace on its own. Plutarch and Ply are exactly that kind of tooling. They are open-source smart contract tools built specifically for Cardano's eUTXO and UPLC, and they're already used in production by a number of teams.
If these tools aren't continuously maintained as the protocol evolves, the teams building on top of them get exposed to migration and rewrite risk. In other words, this isn't a proposal that creates new spending. It's maintenance that keeps an existing ecosystem asset from breaking.
- Abstain51M ₳Rationale
Because of fundamental concerns with the current treasury process, I vote Abstain on all Treasury Withdrawal proposals until the treasury budgeting process undergoes fundamental reform.
More information: https://x.com/ada_stat/status/2068315882539921703
- NoRevoted50.4M ₳Rationale
I am voting No on this proposal. This year's Net Change Limit (NCL) has been set well above the level I consider sustainable. Under my published voting framework, an appropriate NCL is roughly 15% of the previous year's staking rewards (on the order of 82M ADA), whereas the NCL currently in force is several times that amount. Because the treasury is already authorized to disburse far beyond my personal NCL threshold, I am voting No on all treasury withdrawal proposals until aggregate withdrawals are brought back within a sustainable limit — regardless of the individual merits of any single proposal. This vote reflects a position on total treasury spend, not a judgment on the value of your specific project. Reference: https://coffeepool.jp/notes/drep-voting-framework-for-sustainable-ecosystem/\n\n[Japanese version follows]\n\n本提案に反対票を投じます。今年のNet Change Limit（NCL）は、私が持続可能と考える水準を大幅に上回って設定されています。公開済みの投票フレームワークでは、適正なNCLは前年のステーキング報酬の約15%（82M ADA）ですが、現行のNCLはその数倍に達しています。トレジャリーは既に私のpersonal NCL（個人として許容する上限）を大きく超える出金が認められている状態にあるため、出金総額が持続可能な範囲に戻るまで、個別提案の良し悪しに関わらず、すべてのトレジャリー出金提案に反対票を投じます。本投票はトレジャリー支出全体に対する立場の表明であり、貴提案の価値そのものを否定するものではありません。参照: https://coffeepool.jp/notes/drep-voting-framework-for-sustainable-ecosystem-jp/
Earlier votes
No1mo agoSuperseded
I am voting No on this proposal. This year's Net Change Limit (NCL) has been set well above the level I consider sustainable. Under my published voting framework, an appropriate NCL is roughly 15% of the previous year's staking rewards (on the order of ₳82M), whereas the NCL currently in force is several times that amount. Because the treasury is already authorized to disburse far beyond my personal NCL threshold, I am voting No on all treasury withdrawal proposals until aggregate withdrawals are brought back within a sustainable limit — regardless of the individual merits of any single proposal. This vote reflects a position on total treasury spend, not a judgment on the value of your specific project. Reference: https://coffeepool.jp/notes/drep-voting-framework-for-sustainable-ecosystem/ [Japanese version follows] 本提案に反対票を投じます。今年のNet Change Limit（NCL）は、私が持続可能と考える水準を大幅に上回って設定されています。公開済みの投票フレームワークでは、適正なNCLは前年のステーキング報酬の約15%（₳82M程度）ですが、現行のNCLはその数倍に達しています。トレジャリーは既に私のpersonal NCL（個人として許容する上限）を大きく超える出金が認められている状態にあるため、出金総額が持続可能な範囲に戻るまで、個別提案の良し悪しに関わらず、すべてのトレジャリー出金提案に反対票を投じます。本投票はトレジャリー支出全体に対する立場の表明であり、貴提案の価値そのものを否定するものではありません。参照: https://coffeepool.jp/notes/drep-voting-framework-for-sustainable-ecosystem-jp/
- Yes50.2M ₳Rationale
Same rationale as the one presented for the Intersect budget.
- Yes49.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes47.5M ₳No rationale
- No39.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes37.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes37.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes34.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes34.4M ₳Rationale
Socious votes Yes. This 1,162,746 ADA withdrawal funds MLabs' maintenance and enhancement of Plutarch and Ply. Plutarch is a typed eDSL for writing highly optimized Plutus scripts — many production Cardano protocols compile their on-chain code through it because hand-tuned script efficiency translates directly into lower fees and higher throughput for users — and Ply handles the safe serving and reuse of those compiled scripts across off-chain code. Tooling that production dApps already depend on is precisely where unfunded maintenance does the most silent damage at each hard fork. The proposal was vetted and approved through the Intersect community budget process and is disbursed under its milestone-based administration; consistent with Socious's policy of supporting budget-process withdrawals, we vote Yes.
Sociousは賛成します。本引き出し（1,162,746 ADA）は、MLabsによるPlutarchとPlyの保守・強化に資金を供給します。Plutarchは高度に最適化されたPlutusスクリプトを書くための型付きeDSLで、スクリプト効率がそのまま利用者の手数料低減とスループット向上につながるため、多くの本番CardanoプロトコルがオンチェーンコードのコンパイルにPlutarchを使っています。Plyは、コンパイル済みスクリプトをオフチェーンコードから安全に提供・再利用するためのツールです。本番dAppが既に依存しているツーリングこそ、保守資金が絶たれたときにハードフォークごとに最も静かに壊れていく場所です。本提案はIntersectのコミュニティ予算プロセスで審査・承認され、マイルストーンベースの管理下で執行されます。予算プロセスを経た引き出しを支持する方針に沿い、賛成します。
- Yes31.4M ₳Rationale
This is a necessary investment in core developer infrastructure.
Plutarch and Ply are widely used SDKs that many existing Cardano dApps depend on.
Without ongoing maintenance and compatibility updates, developers face migration risk,
increased friction, and potential breakage as the ledger evolves.
The deliverables are technically measurable, and the governance/oversight structure
(Intersect + smart contract controls + independent committee) is strong.
This is maintenance of existing infrastructure, not new expansion, and does not
increase Treasury depletion risk. I therefore vote YES. - Yes30.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes28M ₳No rationale
- Yes27.9M ₳Rationale
I have not personally used Plutarch or Ply and don't really have expertise in them, but based on my research they are both widely used throughout the Cardano ecosystem. Also, MLabs is a reputable firm and the asking price is reasonable. This is a YES vote from me.
- YesRevoted26.1M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes1mo agoSuperseded
Maintains critical developer tooling used throughout the Cardano ecosystem.
- Abstain25.3M ₳Rationale
I am voting ABSTAIN on Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance becuase I do not possess the domain expertise to make judgement as to how these technologies get the ecosystem meaningfully closer enabking applications to achieve market-fit.
- Abstain21.5M ₳Rationale
This vote corresponds with my previous vote on the Hydra Voting platform.
- Abstain21.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes20.9M ₳No rationale
- Abstain20.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes20.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes20M ₳Rationale
As voted in Ekklesia, I vote yes on this proposal. I had hoped Intersect would bundle the winning proposals in one.
- Yes17.4M ₳Rationale
Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarc...
- Yes16.9M ₳Rationale
We support this proposal because Plutarch and Ply are open-source developer tools with clear public-good value for Cardano.
They are used by builders across the ecosystem and help maintain reliable smart-contract development, serialization, compatibility, and developer experience as Cardano evolves.
We also recognize MLabs’ long-standing technical contribution to the ecosystem.
For future renewals, we would like to see clearer maintenance KPIs, adoption reporting, issue-resolution metrics, and a more detailed split between maintenance and new enhancement work.
- No14.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes13.3M ₳Rationale
RCADA votes YES on Withdraw 1,162,746 ada for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch and Ply.
RCADA supports this proposal because Plutarch and Ply are useful open-source developer tools for the Cardano smart-contract ecosystem. Plutarch helps teams build efficient Cardano smart contracts through a Haskell-based eDSL, while Ply supports serialization to and from CIP-57 blueprint-style artifacts and helps protect the boundary between on-chain and off-chain code.
These tools are not user-facing products, but they support teams building Cardano applications. Reliable smart-contract tooling matters because teams need libraries and frameworks that remain compatible with ledger, Plutus, and UPLC evolution. If these tools fall behind, builders may face avoidable friction, migration costs, workarounds, or rewrites.
RCADA views this proposal as practical maintenance funding rather than speculative development. The stated priority order is appropriate: critical breakages and serious vulnerabilities first, then protocol-era and hard-fork compatibility, bug fixes, correctness improvements, optimisations, documentation, examples, technical writing, and developer-experience improvements.
The proposal also demonstrates real ecosystem use. The metadata refers to MLabs identifying active teams building with Plutarch and Ply, although RCADA notes that the proposal uses both a broader and more conservative count. Going forward, RCADA would like to see clear usage reporting so the community can better understand adoption and impact.
The governance and administration structure is positive. This withdrawal passed the required Intersect Budget Process support threshold and will use the 2026 Treasury management smart contract framework, including oversight, milestone-based disbursement controls, and public dashboard visibility.
The requested amount of 1,162,746 ADA is reasonable for annual maintenance and enhancement of specialised smart-contract tooling, provided delivery remains visible. RCADA expects transparent reporting, repository activity, compatibility updates, issue resolution, documentation improvements, examples, and evidence that Plutarch and Ply continue to provide value to production Cardano teams.
On balance, RCADA believes this proposal meets the standard for support. It funds open-source developer infrastructure, supports Cardano’s application layer, reduces maintenance risk for builders, and helps keep important smart-contract tooling reliable as the protocol evolves.
RCADA's full vote assessment can be found here:
https://brolloks.github.io/rcada-drep-votes/ - Yes12.1M ₳Rationale
We support the withdrawal of ₳1,162,746 to fund the continued maintenance and enhancement of Plutarch and Ply, which we consider important developer infrastructure for the Cardano ecosystem.
Our support is primarily based on the proposal addressing a genuine and ongoing ecosystem need. Plutarch and Ply are established open-source tools used by Cardano developers, and their continued maintenance is essential as the protocol, ledger and Plutus ecosystem evolve. Sustained compatibility work, bug fixes, performance improvements, documentation and developer-experience enhancements help protect existing developer investment while reducing friction for teams building and maintaining Cardano applications.
We also view the execution team's prior experience positively. MLabs has an established history of contributing to Cardano developer tooling and has previously delivered work related to Plutarch, including protocol and Conway-era compatibility improvements. This provides confidence that the proposed work is a continuation of an existing area of technical expertise rather than an untested initiative.
The proposal is also strongly aligned with Cardano's governance objectives around adoption, utility and ecosystem development. Funding foundational open-source tooling can generate benefits beyond a single project by supporting multiple developers and applications across the ecosystem. We recognize the importance of ensuring that the substantial requested budget is supported by clear milestones, measurable deliverables and transparent accountability. Nevertheless, we believe the strategic value of maintaining this infrastructure, combined with the team's relevant track record and the ecosystem need identified, provides sufficient justification for approval.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes8.6M ₳Rationale
PlutarchおよびPlyは、Cardanoのスマートコントラクト開発を支える重要なオープンソース基盤であり、その継続的な保守とプロトコル互換性の維持は、Cardanoの開発基盤とエコシステム全体の安定性に重要であると判断し、本提案に賛成します。\n\nPlutarch and Ply are important open-source infrastructure projects that support smart contract development on Cardano. I support this proposal because their continued maintenance and protocol compatibility are important to the stability of Cardano's development infrastructure and the ecosystem as a whole.