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 this proposal.\n\nWhile I am fundamentally supportive of the objective — increasing DeFi liquidity on Cardano — there are procedural and substantive concerns that warrant a negative vote.\n\nFirst, there is a clear and definitive violation of Article III, Section 5 of the Cardano Constitution. The on-chain hash does not match the off-chain governance content. Procedural compliance is critical for maintaining the legitimacy and enforceability of governance outcomes. Allowing proposals that fail such basic checks would weaken trust in the system we are collectively building. Some might argue, that this is the CCs Job, but I won't vote yes for what I believe is unconstitutional to begin with.\n\nBeyond the procedural issues, although I support the concept of using treasury funds to catalyze DeFi liquidity, I believe the scale of the request — 50 million ADA — is too large for an initial deployment. A pilot-sized deployment would provide a valuable proof-of-concept. I understand going too low might not make any impact at all, so I hope there are some reductions to be made and for the project to validate its concept.\n\nI appreciate the design of the proposal’s governance structure. Creating a dedicated committee to manage funds is a positive step toward more specialized and efficient decision-making. I think this is the way to go in my personal opinion. The idea aligns with a concept of a “DAO of DAOs” — potentially enabling individuals to directly propose initiatives within specific governance domains. This is a governance evolution Cardano needs to foster for greater agility and effectiveness.\n\nIt appears likely that the proposers will resubmit after correcting the formatting and hash issues. I encourage this and would welcome a revised proposal that maintains the strong core ideas while addressing procedural compliance and adjusting the initial scope to a more conservative pilot phase.\n\nVOTE0010"
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}