{ "@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": "after careful review of the Cardano Builder DAO treasury withdrawal proposal, i vote yes. the framework is well-specified with clear deliverables: 1) comprehensive ₳12M budget administered by Intersect with proven smart contract controls, 2) reasonable 12-month timeline, 3) transparent governance via five independent oversight entities. most importantly, this fills a critical funding gap for established projects driving real adoption and TVL. the multi-sig structure requiring 3/4 scope leads plus leadership approval provides strong safeguards. seeing the Cardano Foundation, Sundae Labs, and other major builders aligned on this gives confidence. curious about your thoughts on their KPI tracking approach - the focus on measurable metrics like transaction volume and active users seems solid." }, "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256" }