Anchor document

{
  "@context": {
    "CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
    "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
    "body": {
      "@id": "CIP100:body",
      "@context": {
        "references": {
          "@id": "CIP100:references",
          "@container": "@set",
          "@context": {
            "GovernanceMetadata": "CIP100:GovernanceMetadataReference",
            "Other": "CIP100:OtherReference",
            "label": "CIP100:reference-label",
            "uri": "CIP100:reference-uri",
            "referenceHash": {
              "@id": "CIP100:referenceHash",
              "@context": {
                "hashDigest": "CIP100:hashDigest",
                "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm"
              }
            }
          }
        },
        "comment": "CIP100:comment",
        "externalUpdates": {
          "@id": "CIP100:externalUpdates",
          "@context": {
            "title": "CIP100:update-title",
            "uri": "CIP100:uri"
          }
        }
      }
    },
    "authors": {
      "@id": "CIP100:authors",
      "@container": "@set",
      "@context": {
        "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
        "witness": {
          "@id": "CIP100:witness",
          "@context": {
            "witnessAlgorithm": "CIP100:witnessAlgorithm",
            "publicKey": "CIP100:publicKey",
            "signature": "CIP100:signature"
          }
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "authors": [],
  "body": {
    "comment": "I am voting NO on the PFMS proposal requesting 9.6 million ADA from the Cardano treasury.\n\nI support the goal of bringing real world use cases to Cardano. Sustainable transaction activity outside of DeFi speculation is important if network fees are eventually to reduce reliance on the reserve for funding stake pool operators, delegators, and the treasury. However, this particular proposal relies heavily on projections that are not supported by strong evidence, and the majority of the requested funds would be released before those projections are tested through actual usage. For that reason, I do not believe the proposal justifies the size of the treasury allocation.\n\nMy main concerns are as follows:\n\n1: The team’s previous project, FMS (funded with 550,000 ADA from Project Catalyst), fell well short of its forecasts. That project projected roughly one million cases per year. After more than a year in operation, the actual volume of evidence items recorded and the resulting transactions were only a small fraction of what was expected. As a DRep, I have to weigh the current projections against the only quantitative track record we have from the same team. On that basis, the much larger treasury request for PFMS (roughly 17 times the Catalyst amount) is not justified.\n\n2: The proposal places the full cost of development on the treasury while the primary beneficiary is a state government. That government already has a working alternative e-Sakshya, the official evidence recording application that was rolled out by India’s Ministry of Home Affairs and it is already in use across thousands of police stations. \n\n3: Rising ADA prices could undermine the economics of the system for its intended users. As the price of ADA increases, the transaction fees paid by the government would rise. This creates an incentive for the government or other parties to prefer existing alternatives that offer lower and more predictable costs. The proposal does not address how this risk would be managed.\n\n4: The paid verification revenue model remains unproven, yet most of the funds would be released before any real demand is demonstrated. Milestones 0 through 3 release a cumulative 7.8 million ADA without requirements tied to actual usage, adoption, or verified revenue. Only the final 1.8 million ADA release is gated by usage metrics. This structure places the bulk of the financial risk on the treasury before the key economic assumptions have been tested.\n\nFor these reasons, I do not support funding the proposal in its current form. A stronger case would require clearer evidence of demand, better alignment of milestone payments with proven usage, and a more balanced sharing of development costs with the government beneficiary."
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}