Withdraw 3,810,423 ada for Mithril Protocol
162 DReps voted · 50 with a rationale · 2 changed their vote
Open a row to read the rationale.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes8.8M ₳Rationale
MithrilはCardanoの高速なノード同期と信頼不要な状態検証を実現する重要な基盤であり、その継続的な開発はエコシステム全体の安全性、分散性、および利便性の向上に重要であると判断し、本提案に賛成します。\n\nMithril is a key component of Cardano that enables fast node synchronization and trustless state verification. I support this proposal because its continued development is important to improving the security, decentralization, and usability of the Cardano ecosystem.
- Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
This Mithril proposal builds on the strengths of Cardano's infrastructure, allowing for significant improvements in the user experience. I have already voted YES for this proposal on the Ekklesia voting platform. This is just a confirmation of that YES vote.
- Yes7.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.9M ₳Rationale
Consistent with my 2026 Intersect budget process votes, I am voting YES. This is part of the bulk proposals submitted by Intersect from that process.
Hydra Evidence IPFS: https://bafybeie6yykngvn5xsq6va6nwz3sdeadgxd45yhsoeqpuiyxh4tky5tuzi.ipfs.inbrowser.link/
X-Post: https://x.com/mr_cata/status/2063660464450527709?s=20 - Yes5.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.1M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança "Withdraw 3,810,423 ADA for Mithril Protocol" (gov_action1k02990lhw6wh74t7c6ufw3mqaek9ujtvyan99dj5qv5kvcs7pn8s24l0u4y), pois entendemos que o Mithril representa uma infraestrutura estratégica para o ecossistema Cardano, tornando a sincronização e a verificação do estado da blockchain mais rápidas, seguras e descentralizadas. Essa tecnologia reduz a dependência de serviços centralizados e viabiliza o desenvolvimento de carteiras leves, pontes, aplicações e outras soluções que exigem acesso eficiente e confiável ao estado da rede. Embora o valor solicitado, de ₳3.810.423, seja significativo, avaliamos que o custo-benefício é adequado diante do impacto técnico, da relevância da infraestrutura proposta e do potencial de beneficiar todo o ecossistema no longo prazo. O fortalecimento do Mithril contribui diretamente para a escalabilidade, a acessibilidade e a descentralização da rede, criando uma base mais robusta para futuras aplicações e serviços. Também consideramos positivos os mecanismos de governança, controle e transparência previstos na proposta, incluindo desembolsos condicionados ao cumprimento de marcos, supervisão independente, autorizações por múltiplas assinaturas, contratos inteligentes auditáveis e acompanhamento público da execução e da utilização dos recursos por meio de registros on-chain. Esses mecanismos oferecem maior segurança na gestão dos recursos da Tesouraria e permitem que a comunidade acompanhe a evolução das entregas de forma transparente.
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action "Withdraw 3,810,423 ADA for Mithril Protocol" (gov_action1k02990lhw6wh74t7c6ufw3mqaek9ujtvyan99dj5qv5kvcs7pn8s24l0u4y), because we believe Mithril is a strategic piece of infrastructure for the Cardano ecosystem, enabling faster, more secure, and more decentralized blockchain state synchronization and verification. This technology reduces reliance on centralized services while making it easier to build lightweight wallets, bridges, and other applications that require efficient and trustworthy access to blockchain state. Although the requested ₳3,810,423 is substantial, we believe it offers good value considering the project's technical importance and its potential to deliver long-term benefits across the entire ecosystem. Strengthening Mithril directly supports Cardano’s scalability, accessibility, and decentralization, providing a stronger foundation for future applications and network growth. We also view the proposal’s governance, oversight, and transparency mechanisms positively. These include milestone-based disbursements, independent supervision, multisignature authorization, auditable smart contracts, and public on-chain monitoring of both project execution and Treasury fund usage. Together, these measures provide strong accountability and allow the community to transparently verify progress and resource allocation. - Yes4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.8M ₳Rationale
I see this as a administrative vote which is to process a withdrawal that DRep's have previously approved. I do not believe in throwing monkey-wrenches into approved and planned for processes, and thus I vote yes so as not to obstruct progress and momentum, and to not undermine previous decisions.
- Yes3.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.6M ₳Rationale
私は本Treasury Withdrawalに賛成します。
Mithrilは、Cardanoの高速ノード同期、軽量検証、certified snapshotsを支える重要な公共インフラです。将来のlight client、wallet、bridge、monitoring toolingの基盤にもなり、中央集権的なAPIやindexerへの依存を減らす点を高く評価します。
また、本提案はTreasury資金を一括で渡すのではなく、段階支払い、停止、返還、外部oversight、dashboard透明性を備えた資金管理設計になっており、公共資金管理として妥当です。
今後は、milestoneごとの成果物、利用KPI、監査・oversight reportの継続的な公開を求めます。
I support this Treasury Withdrawal.
Mithril is important public infrastructure for Cardano, supporting fast node synchronization, lightweight verification, and certified snapshots. It can also serve as a foundation for future light clients, wallets, bridges, and monitoring tools, while reducing reliance on centralized APIs and indexers.
I also value the funding design, which includes staged payments, pause and return mechanisms, external oversight, and dashboard transparency, rather than a simple upfront transfer of Treasury funds.
Going forward, I expect continued publication of milestone deliverables, usage KPIs, and audit/oversight reports. - Yes2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
Due to rationales becoming stressful and the bear market vibes - I will not be providing rationale. I voted the way that I did bc we need a 'no stress' environment more than ever.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳Rationale
Again only an excerpt "sourced from the approved proposal submitted by the Vendor as part of the Intersect budget process". It's getting tiring.
But Mithril is of strategic importance to the whole Cardano ecosystem, so this has to pass.
- Yes2.1M ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted2.1M ₳Rationale
I am voting YES on this Treasury Withdrawal for the Mithril Protocol.
While the remaining Net Change Limit is now tight, with only around 76.8M ada left, I believe Mithril remains one of the higher-priority uses of Treasury funding. This is not a discretionary marketing spend or a vague ecosystem programme. Mithril is core Cardano infrastructure that supports faster and more secure access to chain state, light-client verification, improved bootstrapping, cross-chain and Layer 2 use cases, and reduced reliance on centralised infrastructure.
The request for 3,810,423 ada is material in the current NCL environment, but proportionate given the importance of Mithril to Cardano’s long-term scalability, decentralisation, and developer infrastructure. I also recognise that this proposal has come through the Intersect budget process and includes an administration and oversight structure rather than a simple unmanaged withdrawal.
My support is not a signal that all remaining Treasury requests should be approved. Quite the opposite: with the NCL becoming increasingly constrained, I believe DReps need to become more selective. I will prioritise core infrastructure, security, open-source tooling, and proposals with clear delivery value over lower-priority or less measurable spending.
Mithril clears that bar for me. It is important, public-good infrastructure for Cardano, and I believe it deserves to be funded.
Earlier votes
Yes25d agoSuperseded
I am voting YES on this Treasury Withdrawal for the Mithril Protocol.
While the remaining Net Change Limit is now tight, with only around 76.8M ada left, I believe Mithril remains one of the higher-priority uses of Treasury funding. This is not a discretionary marketing spend or a vague ecosystem programme. Mithril is core Cardano infrastructure that supports faster and more secure access to chain state, light-client verification, improved bootstrapping, cross-chain and Layer 2 use cases, and reduced reliance on centralised infrastructure.
The request for 3,810,423 ada is material in the current NCL environment, but proportionate given the importance of Mithril to Cardano’s long-term scalability, decentralisation, and developer infrastructure. I also recognise that this proposal has come through the Intersect budget process and includes an administration and oversight structure rather than a simple unmanaged withdrawal.
My support is not a signal that all remaining Treasury requests should be approved. Quite the opposite: with the NCL becoming increasingly constrained, I believe DReps need to become more selective. I will prioritise core infrastructure, security, open-source tooling, and proposals with clear delivery value over lower-priority or less measurable spending.
Mithril clears that bar for me. It is important, public-good infrastructure for Cardano, and I believe it deserves to be funded.
- Yes2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳Rationale
Mithril enables fast, trustless blockchain verification that supports Cardano’s growth while preserving decentralisation.
- No1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.2M ₳Rationale
I vote YES on "Withdraw 3,810,423 ada for Mithril Protocol" because Mithril is core Cardano infrastructure: it helps nodes, wallets, light clients, bridges, and monitoring tools verify Cardano state faster and with less reliance on centralized APIs or full-chain synchronization. This is a high-priority public-good spend, not a speculative subsidy, and the Intersect treasury-contract process gives better fund control than a simple upfront transfer. My concern is that even core infrastructure must meet a higher standard under tight NCL pressure: future funding should show clearer FTE/rate breakdowns, milestone acceptance criteria, usage metrics, wallet/node integration evidence, and a sustainable maintenance path. I support this withdrawal to protect important infrastructure continuity, but I expect sharper reporting and cost transparency before similar future requests.
- Yes1.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.1M ₳No rationale
- YesRevoted1M ₳History
Earlier votes
Yes13d agoSuperseded
- Yes988.4K ₳No rationale
- Yes971.5K ₳Rationale
We vote YES on this proposal because Mithril is an important piece of core infrastructure for Cardano. Fast, verifiable and trust-minimized access to Cardano state is essential if the ecosystem wants to scale without becoming overly dependent on centralized indexers, hosted APIs or heavy full-node requirements. Mithril can improve sync times, support light clients, strengthen cross-chain interoperability, and enable new tools for wallets, bridges, exchanges, monitoring and other infrastructure providers.
We also see this as a continuation of strategically important work that already exists and should not be interrupted. Moving Mithril from IOG-funded development toward a community-governed funding model is a sensible step for long-term sustainability. Given the clear infrastructure value, the relevance for decentralization and adoption, and the focused scope of the proposal, we support this treasury withdrawal.
- Yes964.1K ₳No rationale
- Yes931.8K ₳No rationale