You can find all my votes via this link. https://tempo.vote/drep-profile?dRepId=drep1yguh6dsgx0g58v8pqmxgfrkq0x8vfv6tcp92uzzjrykwy8cjmelsy
Voting Philosophy
In a nutshell, I’ve voted based on my guiding principle: improving Cardano by supporting proven teams, practical tooling, and initiatives that immediately contribute to the scalability and maturity of the ecosystem, while staying around ~200 millions ADA at the maximum to spend.
Below, I’m reiterating some of the reasoning behind my decisions. You’ll also find these detailed in the rationale section for selected vote.
Governance Needs Strategic Reform
In my view, Cardano’s governance should operate with the same level of structure and accountability you would expect from a multinational corporation.
That means starting with a Board of Directors elected by stakeholders—in Cardano’s case, elected on-chain by the community.
Once such a board is in place, a sound process should follow:
- Define the strategy
- Consult with advisors to refine direction
- Assign tasks and responsibilities
- Create and approve a budget
- Ensure a clear process is in place to manage funds—especially in cases where there is a significant divergence in ADA price between proposal submission and fund disbursement.
This is the minimum governance workflow I expect from Intersect—or any body guiding Cardano governance.
Why I Voted “NO” on Key Proposals
Unfortunately, this strategic workflow has not yet materialized, despite repeated calls from myself and others to establish it. Intersect, while initially created to represent DRep interests, has fallen short—particularly in incorporating early and ongoing community feedback.
The recent proposal to support options outside the 39 governance proposals marked a clear break from legitimacy, and a major governance misstep in my view.
For these reasons, I voted NO on several large proposals. I believe both Cardano governance and Intersect require structural reform, beginning with the creation of an on-chain elected board and a revised, transparent decision-making process.
Until that happens, I believe it is more responsible to pause, redesign the governance framework, and only then revisit these proposals under a legitimate, community-aligned process.
Let’s see what the voting results bring. Regardless, the conversation around governance reform is far from over.
Follow-up: August 17, 2025 – end of the voting period.