Withdraw ₳12,000,000 for Cardano Builder DAO administered by Intersect
189 DReps voted · 59 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes 592.3M ₳ Rationale
Summary
Yoroi as DRep votes YES on the governance action to fund Cardano Builder DAO.Rationale
Fills a funding gap: Supports dApps already delivering value but lacking structured long-term funding.
DAO-led transparency: Smart contract oversight, performance-based renewals, and return of unused funds show responsible governance.
Strong community alignment: Backed by key projects like NMKR, TapTools, ADA Handle, and others deeply embedded in the Cardano ecosystem.
We support this effort to help dApps scale responsibly and strengthen the Cardano network’s usability, reach, and economic impact.
- Yes 428.5M ₳ Rationale
I will vote as necessary to help Cardano grow into a platform that supports the economic identities of billions of people. This proposal charges a fair price to achieve what is needed to achieve that.
There are no significant matters that affect the neutrality of my decision-making.
Detailed rationale and the improvements I would like to see made to the proposal are attached in the following spreadsheet "TW vote #01" or PDF.
Specifically with regards to bundled proposals, next time I would request that one of the following be implemented:
- Bundled proposals should be subject to a temperature check vote for each item.
- I would like bundled proposals to be verified or created by entities, consortia, or individuals selected by the DRep.
Spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M8JAuAntJOa7Z6j3GfC2hWFl4kbZLkzEel_cN4-kymw/edit?usp=sharingPDF:
ipfs://bafkreianp5xhbo3ojlxqjjah4kyimr6u62uwnxd2t3lwwu3qmpn4jf4n5a私はCardanoが数十億人の経済アイデンティティを支えるプラットフォームへ成長していくために必要な投票を行います。この提案書は、それを達成するために必要な事項を実現するための正当なコストを請求しています。
私の意思決定の中立性に影響を与える重大な事項はありません。
根拠の詳細と、提案書について私が改善して欲しい点は、次のスプレッドシートの「TW vote #01」またはPDFに添付されています。
特に、バンドル型提案書に関しては、次回は、次のいずれかが実施されることをリクエストします。
- バンドル型提案書は、内訳別の温度チェックの投票を行うこと。 2. バンドル型提案書は、DRepにより選出されるエンティティやコンソーシアムや個人により、検証または作成されるようにして欲しいと思います。
Spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M8JAuAntJOa7Z6j3GfC2hWFl4kbZLkzEel_cN4-kymw/edit?usp=sharingPDF:
ipfs://bafkreianp5xhbo3ojlxqjjah4kyimr6u62uwnxd2t3lwwu3qmpn4jf4n5a - Yes 328.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 297.4M ₳ Rationale
Summary
EMURGO as DRep votes YES on the governance action to fund Cardano Builder DAO based on the rationale below:Rationale
This proposal addresses a critical funding gap for established dApps already driving usage, TVL, and utility on Cardano. EMURGO has always championed initiatives that empower builders to build and scale within the ecosystem, and this DAO offers the right structure for sustained support beyond Catalyst.With a community-led approach, DAO governance, and transparent KPI-based accountability, this proposal complements existing funding pathways while elevating the application layer. We believe it will enhance ecosystem resilience and long-term developer retention;two pillars vital to Cardano's growth.
- Yes 240.8M ₳ No rationale
- Abstain 221.8M ₳ Rationale
TL;DR: EDC voted:
gov_action18nefry4qacd80xzs2srjahxm2e4vz3c8wvrr03rrtk8mdqfuknysq66459t: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqkqx0ecg: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq5nrw6t9: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqj0vdlhj: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqsufvuyl: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqwtnrdnx: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqvckzwqt: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq2yeptuu: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqghuqg03: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqx488pdm: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqyxzxz7k: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqz6d98zp: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqqfgyy3v: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzgf074ea: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzxt5eumh: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzyc3clg6: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzzy7m65d: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzqhm6e8q: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp730y0dn: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp679xfzf: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpcdq823y: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpk0mqrnw: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp5u7pqqr: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpjq3z9u5: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpsn5rx0e: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpwywvhcq: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpvhtd5td: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp2tyw3h6: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpgcp0jyh: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpx66gmxa: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpyflfc4s: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpz4s2af8: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpqx4t762: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq77jt4x4: ABSTAIN
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqudh2k4c: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq63cfnf0: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqczags6z: YES
gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpuz29v77: ABSTAIN
gov_action193leqzml768nz7nmpepzx822a5mzyanqhtewaxjtul5gp6uhwvfsqgl2qg0: YES;We refrained from voting NO on any of the actions, voted ABSTAIN where the majority of our team (7 people) determined that the impact wasn't high enough, the concept wasn't something we would want to support, or the action asked for too much.
Keep in mind, that voting ABSTAIN helps each effected proposal by lowering the absolute voting power needed to pass the action.
- Yes 160.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 135.1M ₳ Rationale
This document provides an aggregate rationale for the Cardano Foundation DRep’s votes on all Treasury Withdrawal GAs stemming from the approved “Cardano Blockchain Ecosystem Budget - 275M ada Administered by Intersect” (gov_action1u9x73kwufaxa70lfy59g4ynwyrcsaxdcd0gxzzmh67s9fxq4j8hqqk2phgh).
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 here; the “Evaluation Framework”) to each proposal while presenting our reasoning in a single, comprehensive document.
Our current assessment remains consistent with the principles previously outlined in our public communications and our evaluation during the Ekklesia off-chain signaling phase. As no material changes have been made to the individual proposals since the overarching budget was approved, our votes on these withdrawals reflect our original assessment of them. However, we have changed our previous abstention on the Intersect proposal and our previous “No” vote for the Discover Cardano proposal to a "Yes" vote.
Fund administration clarity is a crucial consideration for our voting decisions. While this budget is approved as a package, we expect Intersect, as administrator, to manage funds diligently, provide public transparency on contracts, and ensure robust oversight, holding recipients accountable for deliverables.
Our voting decisions on the 39 treasury withdrawals are presented in the table below. The "Vote" column displays our votes. For all proposals requesting 3 million ada or more, our assessment is included in the "Note" column.
Table A – Voting Record
Governance Action ID Title Requested ADA Vote Note gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqz6d98zp 2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal 96,817,080 ABSTAIN We abstain from both the TSC and IO Engineering proposals for the following different reasons: For the TSC proposal, we abstain due to the lack of a credible execution path. Although we support the intent and approach and while we recognise the significant work that went into this proposal, the recent sudden withdrawal of administrative support by the Intersect board makes the proposal unfeasible, even if funded at this time. For the IO Engineering proposal, we abstain as we are not confident that the current version offers sufficient transparency or accountability to justify endorsement. Our concerns stem from the lack of adjustments following constructive community feedback, particularly regarding scope, cost-effectiveness, and safeguards. View Cardano Foundation feedback from 11 May here. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpwywvhcq Catalyst 2025 Proposal by Input Output: Advancing Decentralised Community Innovation Funding & Infrastructure 69,459,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it is important to ensure continuity for the main source of grant funding for the ecosystem during a transition year for governance, especially as Project Catalyst is a funding system that the Cardano ecosystem is familiar with. As the proposal did not fully account for CF's initial budget feedback nor propose activities linked to resolving known shortcomings, we will be monitoring these areas ahead of any subsequent budget proposals by Project Catalyst gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzqhm6e8q Input Output Research (IOR): Cardano Vision - Work Program 2025 26,840,000 ABSTAIN We abstain from this proposal because we view key components of the proposed budget as materially too high, and previous feedback regarding costs and scope, including specific points raised by the Cardano Foundation on March 11 were not adequately addressed. View Cardano Foundation feedback from 11 May here. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp2tyw3h6 A member-based organization for the Cardano ecosystem: Intersect 15,750,000 YES We adjusted our vote from ‘abstain’ to ‘yes’ on this proposal. This reflects our acknowledgement of Intersect's revised 15.75M ada budget, recognizing Intersect's shift towards leaner operations. Our initial vote to abstain based on the discrepancy between the on-chain proposal and the updated off-chain figures, which has been remedied now. We emphasize the importance of having accurate and updated details reflected directly on the Ekklesia platform for all future proposals to ensure transparency and streamline the DRep voting process. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp5u7pqqr Cardano Builder DAO 12,000,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it mitigates the dependency of Cardano on grants by exploring convertible grants to incentivise projects better. The proposal identifies and addresses the gap in post-Catalyst funding for projects needing follow-up support in focusing on achieving product market fit instead of optimising towards grant writing. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqudh2k4c TWEAG’s Proposals for multiple core budget projects for Cardano 2025 11,070,323 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as we believe supporting diverse contributors increases the resilience of Cardano, and as the proposal demonstrates a collaborative approach, accountability, and an appropriate engagement framework. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpjq3z9u5 Unveiling the First Unified Global Events Marketing Strategy for Cardano 6,000,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as it provides a clear value proposition for Cardano. This proposal was already assessed as part of the Marketing and Growth Budget. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpsn5rx0e Cardano Summit 2025 and regional tech events 6,000,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as it provides a clear value proposition for Cardano. This proposal was already assessed as part of the Marketing and Growth Budget. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqkqx0ecg OSC Budget Proposal - Paid Open Source Model for Sustainable Development 5,885,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as it aligns with the Cardano Vision and Roadmap for 2025 and beyond and contributes to a sustainable developer ecosystem for Cardano. However, we still believe additional details would have strengthened this proposal further. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp730y0dn Expanding Stablecoin / Cardano Native Asset Support / Fiat Ramps 4,000,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as it contributes to the growth in liquidity and DeFi, which we believe is an important value proposition. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpcdq823y Ecosystem Exchange Listing and Market Making service pool 3,126,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal in line with the GMC’s voting and according to previous viability assessments. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpuz29v77 High-yield RWA Asset for Cardano : Tokenized Real Estate 3,000,000 YES We vote 'yes' on this proposal as it supports the expansion of the RWA topic. However, there is a lack of alignment with the roadmap, which we would expect to be enhanced afterwards. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqqfgyy3v Midgard - Optimistic Rollups 2,162,096 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpk0mqrnw Complement Catalyst: Extended Quadratic Funding—Zero Operational Costs 1,500,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqyxzxz7k Blockfrost Platform community budget proposal 1,300,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqwtnrdnx zkFold ZK Rollup 1,161,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlp679xfzf Cardano Ecosystem Pavilions at Exhibitions 889,500 YES We adjusted our vote from ‘no’ to ‘yes’ on this proposal. This reflects our acknowledgement of the revised scope to avoid overlapping with other proposals. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzxt5eumh Cardano Product Committee: Community-driven 2030 Cardano Vision and 2026 roadmap insights collection via workshops and structured product research 750,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq77jt4x4 ZK Bridge 700,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpz4s2af8 Scalus - DApps Development Platform 657,692 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpx66gmxa A free Native Asset CDN for Cardano Developers 605,000 NO We vote ‘no’ on this proposal as it does not align with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 3 on Financial and Funding Mechanics. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq5nrw6t9 Complete Web3 developer stack to make Cardano the smart contract layer for Bitcoin 600,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpvhtd5td Beyond Minimum Viable Governance: Iteratively Improving on Cardano Voltaire 592,780 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpqx4t762 Eternl Maintenance 583,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqczags6z Gerolamo - cardano node in typescript 578,571 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqx488pdm Hardware Wallets Maintenance 424,800 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 2 on Committee Budget Proposals and Prior Feedback. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzyc3clg6 PyCardano 314,800 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 3 on Financial and Funding Mechanics. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqj0vdlhj Ledger App Rewrite 300,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpyflfc4s Cexplorer.io – Developer-Focused Blockchain Explorer for Cardano 266,667 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq63cfnf0 MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Plutarch 243,478 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqsufvuyl Dolos: Sustaining a Lightweight Cardano Data Node 220,914 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlq2yeptuu UTxO RPC: Sustaining Cardano Blockchain Integration 220,914 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqghuqg03 Pallas: Sustaining Critical Rust Tooling for Cardano 220,914 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlpgcp0jyh AdaStat.net Cardano blockchain explorer 212,000 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzzy7m65d OpShin - Python Smart Contracts for Cardano 199,911 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 3 on Financial and Funding Mechanics. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlqvckzwqt Lucid Evolution Maintenance 130,903 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action13tfag48nf94rtjcdq7c06vhkslmxxw9h6c88sl7q5g5nnewcsvlzgf074ea MLabs Research towards Tooling for Elliptical Curves - GrumpleStiltSkin 104,347 YES We vote ‘yes’ on this proposal as it aligns with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action193leqzml768nz7nmpepzx822a5mzyanqhtewaxjtul5gp6uhwvfsqgl2qg0 BloxBean Java Tools Maintenance and Enhancement 99,600 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. gov_action18nefry4qacd80xzs2srjahxm2e4vz3c8wvrr03rrtk8mdqfuknysq66459t MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Cardano.nix 45,217 ABSTAIN We abstain on this proposal in accordance with the principles of the Evaluation Framework, specifically principle 1 on Scope and Strategic Alignment. Summary of Voting Approach
The Cardano Foundation’s votes on these 39 treasury-withdrawal governance actions are the direct execution of a single, comprehensive review process that began during the off-chain signaling 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.
Evaluation Framework
As outlined in our blog post, Navigating Budget Changes, our evaluation is guided by several core criteria. For these treasury withdrawals, our assessment focused on three primary areas:
- Strategic Alignment: We prioritized proposals that clearly align with the Cardano 2025 Vision & Roadmap and the principles of "Our Cardano." Proposals demonstrating a direct contribution to core infrastructure, ecosystem growth, decentralization, and sustainability scored highest in our assessment.
- Execution Viability & Financials: We assessed whether the requested funding was appropriate with the project’s scope and whether the team demonstrated the expertise and planning necessary for successful execution. This included a review of the budget breakdown, timelines, and risk considerations.
- Accountability and Delivery Assurance: A critical factor was the proposal’s commitment to transparency and accountability. We looked for clear deliverables, defined success metrics, and robust reporting plans. Given the significant value of Treasury funds, we placed a strong emphasis on frameworks that ensure what is promised is ultimately delivered.
The Cardano Foundation’s votes on these 39 treasury-withdrawal governance actions are the direct execution of a single, comprehensive review process that began during the off-chain signaling 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.
- No 93.3M ₳ Rationale
The vote for this withdrawal is NO. Details can be found in the rationale.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I plan to vote YES on most projects I’ve supported in Ekklesia. To stay transparent, I’ll rate each project across six categories, scoring 0 to 2 per category (max 12 points). Projects scoring below 6 won’t get my support. I’ll consider supporting those with 7–8 points, and will fully support any scoring 9 or more.
The categories are:
- Key infrastructure, research, or essential funding: 2
- Team strength, feasibility, and track record: 1
- Impact on the Cardano ecosystem: 1
- Value for money: 1
- Cost compared to similar proposals: 1
- Personal or community usage and benefit: 1
Total score: 7
- Yes 92.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 89.8M ₳ Rationale
SIPO votes YES on the proposal to withdraw ₳12,000,000 for the Cardano Builder DAO administered by Intersect.
Reason for Support
SIPO recognizes the strategic necessity of establishing a sustainable funding mechanism for live, high-impact dApps that are already deployed on the Cardano mainnet. While Project Catalyst supports early-stage innovation and core development budgets maintain protocol progress, there remains a critical gap in mid-to-late-stage application support—this proposal directly addresses that.
Key Evaluation Points
• Strengthening On-Chain Activity: Funding active applications will contribute directly to increasing transactions, active users, and TVL—key metrics of network health.
• Sustainable Growth: By enforcing metrics-first funding with clear KPIs (e.g., active wallets, commits, usage), the DAO introduces measurable accountability into the funding cycle.
• Clarity Smart Contract Stack: The Clarity governance system and Agora contract library are already field-tested and audited, having managed over $10M TVL in other DAOs—showing technical readiness and maturity.
• Builder Representation: The initial cohort includes real Cardano builders with functioning dApps, ensuring legitimate representation and alignment with user and network needs.
• Complementary to Catalyst: By creating a distinct funding path for mature dApps, this DAO reduces dependency on Project Catalyst, freeing Catalyst to focus on experimentation and innovation.Governance Assurance
SIPO appreciates the use of:
• Intersect’s smart contract framework (audited by TxPipe and MLabs),
• Multi-party oversight (including Cardano Foundation, Sundae Labs, NMKR, etc.),
• A clear milestone-driven disbursement model,
• And full transparency via TRSC/PSSC dashboards.These governance and assurance systems meet the constitutional standards for accountability and risk management.
⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻⸻
SIPOは、「Intersectが管理するCardano Builder DAO」への₳12,000,000のトレジャリー引き出し提案に賛成票を投じます。
支持の理由
SIPOは、メインネット上で既に稼働している有力dAppの継続的支援を実現する仕組みとして、このDAOの設立が戦略的に不可欠であると考えます。
Catalystは初期段階のアイデアを育てるために重要ですが、既存のユーザー獲得やTVLの増加を牽引しているプロダクトには、持続的な資金支援とガバナンスが必要です。この提案は、その空白を埋めるための制度構築です。主な評価ポイント
• オンチェーン活動の強化：資金を既存dAppに供給することで、トランザクション数、アクティブユーザー数、TVLなどのネットワーク健全性を示す指標の向上が期待できます。
• 持続可能な成長：KPIに基づいた資金提供によって、ROIの可視化が進み、コミュニティに対して説明可能な形での資金活用が実現されます。
• Clarityガバナンス基盤の実績：すでに1,000万ADA超のTVLを扱うDAOにて稼働中のスマートコントラクト群が使われ、監査済かつ実戦で鍛えられたシステムである点を高く評価します。
• 現場ビルダーの参画：初期メンバーにCardano上でdAppを展開している開発者が含まれており、実効性の高いDAO構成が期待されます。
• Catalystとの明確な役割分担：実用フェーズに入ったプロジェクトはBuilder DAOで支援し、Catalystは実験・検証段階に集中できるため、エコシステム全体の資金循環の最適化につながります。ガバナンス体制と信頼性
提案には以下のような強固な体制が備わっており、憲法上求められる透明性・説明責任・監査性を満たしています：
• Intersectが管理するスマートコントラクト基盤（監査済）
• Cardano FoundationやSundae Labsを含む5団体による第三者監督
• マイルストーンに基づく段階的な資金配分
• ダッシュボードによるオンチェーンの資金トラッキングとコミュニティ監視⸻
Conclusion｜結論
SIPOは、Cardano Builder DAOが中長期的なCardanoアプリケーション層の拡充と持続性の確保にとって極めて重要な提案であると判断し、賛成票を投じます。
この取り組みは、分散型ファイナンスと自律型エコシステムの実現に向けた、実務的かつ制度的な前進であり、Catalyst・Intersect・Builderが連携する三位一体のモデル形成を推進するものです。 - No 89.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 89.2M ₳ Rationale
私の投票ポリシーはCARDANO2025ロードマップを実現するべく基盤技術の維持と強化、コア開発と研究、マーケティングの強化を支持しています。事前のオフチェーン投票ではNoにした提案においても、提案内容に関しては一定の必要性を感じているため資金調達プロセスのスケジュールや提案内容を精査したうえでYESに投じます。
My voting policy supports the maintenance and enhancement of foundational technologies, core development and research, and the strengthening of marketing efforts to realize the CARDANO 2025 roadmap. Even for proposals I previously voted "No" on during the off-chain voting phase, I recognize a certain level of necessity in their content. Therefore, after carefully reviewing both the proposal content and the funding schedule, I will cast a "Yes" vote. - Yes 77.3M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 71.3M ₳ Rationale
I was on the fence, as I'm not a fan of the proposed metrics. However, I'm voting YES because this DAO fills a critical gap between Catalyst and the OSC, especially for supporting builders integrating new tech like Leios. I will be monitoring this DAO's professionalism and conduct closely.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
I was on the fence with this proposal, but will be voting a cautious YES. I have reservations about the proposed metrics, but a clear funding gap exists between Catalyst and the OSC.
This DAO is uniquely positioned to fill that gap by supporting established builders integrating core advancements like Leios. My confidence in many of the reputable builders involved and ones I had spoken with regarding this, ultimately sways my vote especially when factoring in historical behaviour, I had concerns of some members especially ones with close partnerships, although this was promptly responded to by the DAO. I feel the response does drive a fair chance. I expect professionalism from this DAO, and I will be monitoring its conduct closely, as it will be a driving factor in my decisions on any future funding. I would love to see regular updates and transparency. I like the idea overall.
- Yes 70.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 68M ₳ Rationale
This proposal aims to establish the Cardano Builder DAO (CB DAO), providing sustainable support and strategic oversight for dApps already live on mainnet. Its focus on supporting proven projects with on-chain activity and requiring transparent KPI reporting makes it a meaningful step toward strengthening Cardano’s application layer.
The team behind Clarity and Agora has a strong track record in DAO infrastructure and governance tooling, giving confidence in their ability to deliver.
For these reasons, I vote YES on this proposal.
本提案は、既にメインネットで稼働しているdAppに対して、持続的な支援と戦略的な監督を行うDAO（CB DAO）の立ち上げを目的としています。オンチェーン活動やTVLといった実績のあるプロジェクトを対象に、資金支援と透明なKPI報告を求める仕組みは、Cardanoのアプリケーション層の成長にとって重要と判断しました。
ClarityやAgoraといったガバナンス基盤を既に運用しているチームによる実装であり、DAO運営の経験と技術力にも信頼を置けます。
以上から、私は本提案にYES票を投じます。
- Yes 65.7M ₳ Rationale
After in-depth discussions during RareEvo and an analysis of the proposal, I have reconsiderend and decided to change my vote from 'abstain' to 'yes'.
- Abstain 62.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 51.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 50.5M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 49.8M ₳ Rationale
As a DRep, I voted for all projects in the 2025 budget vote based on a very simple principle:\n\n- Yes if I believe the long-term value to the Cardano ecosystem exceeds the requested amount;\n- No if it doesn't;\n- Abstain if I'm unsure.\n\nAll of my votes are consistent with my position in the May 2025 Ekklesia round.
- No 49.7M ₳ Rationale
Following the previous vote on Ekklesia.
- Abstain 48.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 42.9M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 42.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 40M ₳ Rationale
This request goes directly to active reputable startups in the space based on criteria that bring transactions to Cardano and fill blockspace. I do not understand why this is being administered by Intersect but hopefully next time this will be run by another Administrator.
- No 38.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 36.8M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 34.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 34.3M ₳ Rationale
Socious has voted in favor of all 39 Treasury Withdrawal proposals submitted. These proposals were selected through a well-defined process, and we fully support them out of respect for the will of the broader Cardano community.
- Abstain 32.3M ₳ Rationale
Temporary Abstention Rationale
Summary
To ensure timely progression of proposals that meet constitutional thresholds, I am temporarily casting abstain votes on all active governance actions while I continue to review them individually. This avoids delaying enactment due to quorum issues and allows careful evaluation of each on its own merits.Rationale Statement
As a DRep, I take seriously my responsibility to evaluate each proposal in alignment with the HOSKY Cardano First platform, prioritizing decentralization, responsible treasury use, and the long term integrity of CardanoRather than rush through the volume of proposals or risk being a bottleneck for those that meet required thresholds, I am temporarily abstaining on all proposals. This ensures that governance actions with sufficient community support can move forward without being held up by my pending vote
This abstention is not a sign of indecision or neglect. It is a reflection of my commitment to deliberate, well considered governance. I am reviewing each proposal carefully and will cast definitive YES or NO votes with rationale in the coming days
This approach allows me to maintain transparency, uphold voting integrity, and respect the time sensitive nature of decentralized decision making. It is a temporary mechanism to preserve network momentum while continuing to uphold the standards set by both the Constitution and the HOSKY dRep Platform
- Yes 31M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 28.2M ₳ Rationale
Although this item has a high price tag, I see it as a useful complement to Catalyst that will help close the gap between a project's innovation and productization. Builder DAO makes sense as a next step for a project after it has delivered its MVP though Catalyst.
- Yes 27.4M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 26.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 25.9M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 25.2M ₳ Rationale
I have voted YES on the current proposal to fund Cardano Builder DAO. I believe startups should find their path to stand on their own revenue, I understand a little help can go a long way, and I also believe its ok to fail.
I would normally have abstained, but these guys deserve a shot at finding footing. Given I am voting yes and not abstaining, I commit DripDropz will neither vote or pursue funds relevant to funding associated with this proposal
- Abstain 22.7M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 22M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 22M ₳ No rationale
- No 21.3M ₳ Rationale
Although the vision of supporting live dApps via a Builder DAO is promising, I vote NO for the following reasons:
Undefined governance structure: The proposal lacks clear information on DAO membership criteria, decision-making, and accountability. Without a well-defined structure, it risks centralization and inefficiency.
Redundancy & ecosystem overlap: There's insufficient explanation on how this DAO complements – rather than duplicates – existing funding mechanisms like Project Catalyst.
High risk, large budget: Requesting ₳12M without a smaller-scale pilot or proven track record is premature. It is unclear how builder applications, evaluations, and fund disbursement will be handled.
Not yet community-led: Despite aiming to empower builders, the DAO appears top-down and admin-driven at this stage.
I would support a revised, smaller-scope pilot with transparent milestones and decentralized governance design.
Vietnamese
Tôi đánh giá cao ý tưởng thành lập DAO hỗ trợ các dApp đã hoạt động, nhưng bỏ phiếu KHÔNG vì những lý do sau:
Thiếu rõ ràng về mô hình quản trị: Đề xuất không nêu rõ cách chọn thành viên DAO, quy trình ra quyết định hay cơ chế minh bạch và giải trình trách nhiệm.
Chồng chéo với Catalyst: Chưa thể hiện rõ cách DAO này bổ sung thay vì trùng lặp với các cơ chế cấp vốn hiện tại trong hệ sinh thái.
Rủi ro cao với ngân sách lớn: Đề xuất rút ₳12 triệu mà không có giai đoạn thử nghiệm nhỏ hay minh chứng về năng lực triển khai là quá mạo hiểm.
Chưa thể hiện tính phi tập trung: Mặc dù nói là hỗ trợ cộng đồng builder, nhưng hiện tại DAO vẫn đang được thiết kế theo hướng từ trên xuống, chưa trao quyền rõ ràng cho cộng đồng.
Tôi sẽ ủng hộ nếu có một đề xuất thử nghiệm quy mô nhỏ, minh bạch, có lộ trình rõ ràng và cộng đồng tham gia thực chất.
Japanese
Builder DAOの設立は魅力的なビジョンですが、以下の理由から**反対票（NO）**を投じます：
不明確なガバナンス構造：メンバー選定や意思決定プロセス、説明責任の仕組みが明示されておらず、中央集権化と非効率のリスクがあります。
Catalystとの重複懸念：既存の資金調達メカニズムとの関係が不明確で、資源の最適活用が問われます。
過剰な予算要求：₳12百万という巨額な要求に対し、パイロットや具体的な実績が不足しています。
分散型運営ではない：コミュニティ主導のDAOと謳っているものの、現段階ではトップダウン方式に見受けられます。
透明性ある小規模パイロット案が提示されれば、再度検討する価値はあると考えています。
- Yes 21.2M ₳ Rationale
I have debated between abstain and yes for this proposal for a while. I recognise the need for a funding mechanism that complements Catalyst, that allows more established projects to receive development funding that doesn’t detract from Catalyst’s role as an innovation engine for new and smaller projects. I also appreciate that it could be too much to expect each and every project to seek treasury funding every time that they have a proposal for new products or features. This increases administrative burden on both the developers and DReps/CC.
However, I also respect that cryptocurrency is usually about removing/reducing middlemen and this approach also reduces the ability for DReps to have a say in what gets funded. Similar to my rationale for the Paid Open-Source Model proposal though, I feel that this does fill a gap in current funding avenues, allowing developers to focus on building rather than bureaucracy.
With that said, I will be watching the performance and outputs from this DAO going forward before committing to future funding.
While not originally one of my selections during the Ekklesia budget reconciliation process, I have decided to vote in favour of funding this proposal at this time.
- Yes 21.1M ₳ Rationale
This proposal fills ecosystem gap by funding high-impact applications with proven users. Its transparent governance, metrics-based funding approach, and smart contract enforcement create strong accountability while complementing existing funding structures and potentially increasing network usage.
The proposal addresses a critical ecosystem gap by providing sustainable funding to high-impact applications driving actual on-chain activity. With transparent governance, metrics-based funding, and smart contract enforcement, it creates accountability mechanisms that align with our guidelines on oversight. The project's focus on supporting launched dApps with proven users complements existing funding structures while potentially increasing network usage and TVL.
- Yes 21.1M ₳ No rationale
- Yes 20.3M ₳ No rationale
- No 17.4M ₳ Rationale
This represents a more opaque version of Project Catalyst whereby a small committee can obtain the power to control a slush fund. Project Catalyst is preferable for such funding with its direct community voting and oversight.
- Yes 17.1M ₳ No rationale
- No 16.7M ₳ Rationale
Long-Term Sustainability
While creating a Builder DAO could support long-term innovation, the proposal lacks a clearly defined structure, governance model, and mechanisms for sustainable funding allocation. Without those, it risks becoming another siloed funding body with unclear alignment to Cardano’s roadmap.Builder and Ecosystem Growth
The proposal does not outline how builders will apply, be evaluated, or supported. It’s unclear how it avoids overlapping with Catalyst or existing treasury pathways, raising questions about efficiency and redundancy.Decentralization and Community Engagement
Despite claiming to empower community builders, the DAO structure is undeveloped, with no clarity on member selection, transparency, or accountability. The decision-making process is top-down at this stage, not community-led.Responsible Treasury Spending
₳12,000,000 is an extraordinarily high request for an initiative that lacks foundational governance, technical planning, and operational details. Funding a DAO in name only, without concrete architecture or track record, is a high-risk use of treasury funds. We recommend voting NO until a smaller, transparent pilot with clear controls and milestones is proposed. - No 16.4M ₳ Rationale
Treasury withdrawals
Software Development Proposals:
Development budgets should not be funded from the treasury. Instead, the treasury should be used to incentivize feature completion through grants. The treasury should not operate as a venture capital fund or to fund ongoing development budgets. It should be results oriented and decoupled from budgeting. Dracula DAO Deep will make exceptions this round for projects that deliver specific, high value features or results at a reasonable ask amount.Marketing Proposals:
Marketing budgets are the best way to fund these types of efforts. Judgement should be used based on the ask amount and value proposition.Research Proposals:
Research budgets should be evaluated based on the track record of the team being funded, the value proposition and whether the results are released to the public.DAO Funding:
DraculaDAO believes DAOs should find other ways to support operations other than public treasury funds.Bitcoin:
Dracula DAO Deep is against purchasing Bitcoin with treasury funds, and are generally not in favor of a tight Bitcoin / Cardano partnership. Bitcoin DeFi is ok as long as the value proposition remains with Cardano. Cardano is already Bitcoin++ and treasury funds should not be used to encourage or sustain BTC energy waste and outdated consensus model.Yes - MLabs Core Tool Maintenance. Ask is reasonable.
Yes - Midgard Optimistic Rollups. This is urgently needed as an L2 solution for Cardano and the ask is reasonable.
Yes - Hardware Wallets Maintenance. This is necessary and ask is reasonable.
Yes - Pallas Rust Tooling. Core tooling used by many projects and ask is reasonable for the specific deliverable.
Yes - UTxO RPC
Yes - Lucid Evolution Maintenance
Yes - zkFold ZK Rollup
Yes - Dolos. Ask is reasonable with specific deliverable.
Yes - Ledger App rewrite
Yes - Paid Open Source Model. This looks like a nice way to take the VC function out of the treasury and start towards incentivizing projects through features and benefits like bug bounties. Willing to take a chance on this, but will vote no in the future if results are disappointing.
Yes - Gerolamo node in typescript
Yes - MLabs Core Tools: Plutarch. Ask is reasonable
Yes - ZK Bridge
Yes - Eternal maintenance
Yes - Scalus Development Platform
Yes - Cexplorer.io
Yes - Native Asset CDN
Yes - Adastat.net
Yes - Intersect MBO. DraculaDAO does not like the high ask amount and the budgeting approach, but for Intersect MBO there may not be a better way like there is with software development. Therefore DraculaDAO supports this proposal, realizing this possibly breaks with the general guidelines DraculaDAO described above.
Yes - Beyond Minimum Viable Governance. Focused feature set and reasonable ask. IOHK should use this approach for all its teams.
Yes - Cardano Summit
Yes - Unified Global Events Marketing
Yes - Quadratic Funding. Reasonable ask for a specific feature.
Yes - Cardano Ecosystem Pavilions
Yes - High-yield RWA Asset. Direct communication with this vendor increased our faith in this project and have changed our stance on this.
Yes - Expanding Stablecoin / Native Asset Support. This was marginal in terms of ask amount and number of features grouped together.
Yes - OpShin
Yes - PyCardano
Yes - Cardano Product Committee
Yes - BloxBean Java Tools
Yes - Input Output Research
Yes - MLabs ResearchAbstain - Input Output Core Development. This is simply a warning shot as DraculaDAO expects this proposal will pass. We are generally in favor of the initiatives and features being delivered by IOHK, but believe the ask is too high as a single budget line item and do not want to set a precedent of another ask of similar magnitude for the next budget cycle. Instead, IOHK should divide its deliverables into features and ask the treasury for grant incentives delivered on completion of the each feature (see Beyond Minimum Viable Governance as what we see as a good example). We are not in favor of such a large withdrawal encompassing such a large number of features. In general we do not support using the treasury for budget line items as mentioned in the introduction to this rationale.
Abstain - Blockfrost Community Budget. We support Blockfrost and operate an icebreaker node. There are no specific features mentioned, just an ongoing budget line item, which we do not support. We will support Blockfrost in other ways.No - Web3 developer stack for Bitcoin integration. DraculaDAO does not support a tight integration with Bitcoin.
No - TWEAG Proposals. We see value there but the ask is too large and too many deliverables bundled together.
No - Catalyst 2025. Ask is too large as a single budget request.
No - Cardano Builder DAO. Treasury should not be used to incentivize features, not fund ongoing budgets for software development or DAOs.
No - Market making should have other ways to fund operations.