Withdraw ₳2,162,096 for Midgard - Optimistic Rollups administered by Intersect
190 DReps voted · 53 with a rationale · 10 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes8.8M ₳Rationale
「275M ADA Administered by Intersect」に含まれるすべての個別提案に対して、エクレシア投票の段階では必ずしもすべてに賛成していたわけではありませんが、最終的には本ガバナンスアクションに賛成票を投じました。Cardanoエコシステム全体への貢献を高く評価し、その前進を後押しする立場から、今回提出された39件すべての提案に賛成票を投じる判断をいたしました。\n\nWhile I did not necessarily support every individual proposal included in "275M ADA Administered by Intersect" during the Ekklesia vote, I ultimately voted Yes on this governance action. Recognizing its overall contribution to the Cardano ecosystem and in support of continued progress, I cast a Yes vote on all 39 proposals submitted under this initiative.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
I have voted YES for this proposal in the Ekklesia temperature check and confirm that vote here.
I will keep the rationale brief for expediency - as 38 proposals were submitted concurrently by Intersect today.
Midgard should allow the building of true L2 rollups that inherit full security from Cardano. The proposing team has contributed massively to Cardano so far. This is an important proposal to improve one of the current bottlenecks of Cardano. Direct funding from the treasury seems appropriate for a proposal of this format.
- Yes7.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
Voting decision was made to be consistent with my reconciliation back in May 2025;
https://2025budget.intersectmbo.org/voters/drep1yfdfs28uwafjgmrkatdektlzrvha2cmvqjhuz700e04mawq23rmrgReady to move forward overall with the budgeting process and look forward to a smoother process next year. I voted for a lower NCL overall (200M), however found in supporting things that we really ought to have funded to keep momentum in development and enhancements on-chain (supporting both open and non-open-sourced projects) I came a bit higher than that (250M+).
We will need to strike a balance in treasury withdrawels for projects that push development forward (and therefore the chains efficiency, performance, resiliancy, and security) -- and businsess that wish to participate, of any size, and extend the capabilities and real-world use cases of Cardano.
My votes, I hope, align with my overall goal as a DRep to see continuous improvement in the ecosystem. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Tarrant64/mr_cata_gov/refs/heads/main/mr_cata_gov%20.txt
- Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳Rationale
Midgard’s proposal directly aligns with STORM Partners’ objective to make Cardano more efficient and strengthen its technical capabilities. We consider Midgard a cornerstone project for realizing the scaling ambitions of the Basho era. It is poised to demonstrate the unique advantages of Cardano's eUTxO model for rollups, representing the ecosystem's best opportunity for a truly native Layer 2 solution. The team is highly capable and committed to Cardano's success, and we believe the proposed budget is entirely reasonable for the immense value it will deliver.
- Yes4.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳Rationale
Midgard is an essential piece for L2s, higher throughput and advanced decentralized applications
- Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
I'm voting yes, as per list described in my tweet:
https://x.com/OracleAltcoin/status/1917257059071934483Core engineering first, decentralization of influence and conservative with the treasury.
Strength and honor. - Yes3.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.1M ₳Rationale
I am following through with my YES vote from the Cardano Budget 2025 Ekklesia process. This proposal falls within my personal NCL of 250,000,000 ADA.
- YesRevoted3M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes0y agoSuperseded
Yes0y agoSuperseded
No1y agoSuperseded
No1y agoSuperseded
- Abstain2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳Rationale
The Midgard team hosts some of the top development talent on Cardano. Ask seems within reason based on outputs. I trust this team to deliver.
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳Rationale
A couple of months ago, I supported the resolution to bundle all of the Intersect Budget Proposals into 1 or 2 formal on-chain governance votes.
Each of these proposals has already received 50% or greater support from the active DReps in the ecosystem, and I will honor that prior decision.
A couple of months ago, I supported the resolution to bundle all of the Intersect Budget Proposals into 1 or 2 formal on-chain governance votes.
Each of these proposals has already undergone extensive scrutiny and received 50% or greater support from the active DReps in the ecosystem, and I will honor that prior decision and the work these prospective developers have put in by voting yes on all the proposals from the Intersect Budget team.
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
Midgardは、UTxOモデルを活かしたCardano独自のロールアップ設計を追求する先進的提案であり、HydraやPartnerchainとは補完的に機能するレイヤー2ソリューションです。トークンレス設計、ADA決済維持、L1帰属収益構造の工夫も評価でき、低予算で高い技術的意義があるため賛成します。
Midgard proposes a UTxO-native optimistic rollup framework that complements Hydra and partnerchains, aiming to enhance scalability while preserving ADA-based fee payments and on-chain economic alignment. Its tokenless, L1-rooted design and efficient budget make this a high-leverage investment. I vote in favor.
- YesRevoted2.5M ₳Rationale
I interpret the budget info action proposals as an entangled whole and I do not want to break it. That's why I vote in favor.
Earlier votes
Yes1y agoSuperseded
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
Optimistic rollups and ZK rollups are both important for our technology to be as robust as our competitors and at this point it makes sense to invest in both.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted2.3M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes11mo agoSuperseded
- Yes2.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳Rationale
I decided to vote ✅ YES on 37 treasury withdrawals, ➖ ABSTAIN on none, and ❌ NO on 2 treasury withdrawals from the Intersect 2025 budget.
It’s obvious I consider all proposals I approved in the budget vote on Ekklesia beneficial for Cardano, so those all receive a ✅ YES vote.
I also vote ✅ YES for most proposals I initially abstained from or voted against in the Ekklesia vote. There are a few reasons for this:
- Some proposals gained strong community support after all, so I don’t want to be the one standing in the way, especially when the requested amount is negligible in the bigger picture.
- Some proposals I actually liked, but I found them more suitable for Catalyst. However, with all the delays, it now makes more sense to fund them as soon as possible.
- Some didn’t get my initial support because I thought the requested amount was too high. But I now believe it’s better for the ecosystem to fund them, despite the larger budget, than not fund them at all.
- I needed to vote for budget proposals with my own NCL in mind. Not all those I approved made it, however, so that leaves some room for other ones.
I won’t approve the treasury withdrawal for two proposals:
❌ Withdraw ₳3,000,000 for High-yield RWA Asset for Cardano: Tokenized Real Estate
This proposal won’t bring much value to our ecosystem, imho.❌ Withdraw ₳1,500,000 for Complement Catalyst: Extended Quadratic Funding---Zero Operational Costs
While the proposal includes some interesting ideas for a fairer voting mechanism, I now support Catalyst and don’t see the need for an additional funding system at this moment, especially considering total spending. The requested amount also seems too small to meaningfully fund multiple projects. While the model relies on donations, it’s unclear what the donor incentive is. Since voting power is tied to donation size, why wouldn’t donors just support specific fundraisers run directly by the projects they care about? That way, they can ensure their contribution goes straight to their preferred initiative without needing it to win a vote first.
I do appreciate the idea of a hybrid funding model where the treasury covers part of a project, but ideally, the remaining portion should come from investors rather than donations, imho.
Lastly, I don’t appreciate that the proposal’s title refers to Catalyst, even though it has no relationship to it. This seems intended to mislead people into thinking Catalyst would benefit from this proposal, which it doesn’t...I acknowledge there’s a metadata issue in the proposal “Withdraw ₳45,217 for MLabs Core Tool Maintenance & Enhancement: Cardano.nix”, but I approved it nonetheless, as the problem is minor and not worth obstructing the process.
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.5M ₳Rationale
This proposal should proceed for its innovative EUTxO rollups. It might bring a great improvement in Cardano's On-chain transaction efficiency
- Yes1.4M ₳No rationale