{
  "@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"
          }
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "body": {
    "comment": "The current version of the Cardano Constitution is the result of efforts of a large number of Cardano community members, and is the best constitution we will get for now. \n\nThere is plenty of room for improvement, and while I may disagree with some aspects of the Cardano Constitution, it is time to move forward with what we currently have.\n\nWe will have plenty of opportunities to make improvements to the constitution in the future, and here are some areas I think merit serious attention going forward:\n\n\n- The overall lack of on chain enforceability of the constitution. We have already seen in the past that social pressure is not enough, such as with the centralization of Stake Pools, leaving us with ~20% of operators controlling ~80% of all stake.\n\n- The lack of choice for governance models other than 1 lovelace = 1 vote from the beginning. DIDs and quadratic voting would put us in a much better governance model that does not lead to centralized oligarchy or plutocracy, and we are sadly in this situation right from the start of governance, which was predetermined for CIP 1694.\n\n- It would be smart to encourage ADA holders financially to participate in governance. Using a carrot method instead of the current stick method (can't withdraw rewards until delegating) would get better results. Having a portion of treasury rewards allocated to ADA holders who actually delegate to a DRep vs Auto Abstain, and encourage decentralization by having overall better rewards if the DRep is not in the very top rankings by stake delegated. This would encourage more active participation and movement of delegated voting power.\n\n- Article 1, Section 1, TENET 9 and Article 2, Section 2 are already in violation by deliberately making it financially difficult to participate in governance. \n\nDRep and Direct Voter registration fees should be lowered significantly so that meaningful participation can happen. Finances alone are not an adequate determining factor for leadership or governance capabilities of a person, especially when Cardano is global and many cannot afford a 500 ADA deposit but could offer meaningful governance contributions.\n\nThe same goes for the *govDeposit* amount for submitting governance actions - 100,000 ADA is set deliberately high with the reasoning that it will limit spam. DReps and ADA holders were told that we would have ADA pooling tools available to mitigate this very high barrier to entry in order for meaningful participation to still happen - we did not get these tools, and still don't have them. We cannot have a deliberately high financial barrier to governance participation if we want true decentralized governance like what is preached. So either we need *govDeposit* to be lowered to ~5000 ADA, or we need the tooling that was promised to be present on gov.tools\n\n\n- Article 3, Section 5 has been violated by gov.tools already, so we need at least 1 alternative interface platform to gov.tools with similar functionality to ensure there is a second valid and useful option.\n\nWhenever I experienced technical issues with gov.tools, I filled out their support form and also contacted their support email. I received no response back on multiple occasions, but the issues were eventually quietly *fixed*. My governance dashboard is still broken and doesn't display my previous voting history. I expect a real tech support team for any governance dashboard for Cardano - one that can be effectively contacted and replies to emails.\n\nThere is also currently no way for a competing Cardano Constitution to be submitted in time on gov.tools, as this function will not be able to be enabled in time for whatever reason. A deliberate choice that was made which leaves no possibility of alternative constitution choice. I doubt we could have a better submission in time, but I expect transparency and undue influence / manipulation to be followed if it is supposed to be enshrined in this constitution."
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}