{
  "@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": "Summary\nYoroi DRep votes NO on \"Cardano dOSPO and OMF Program\", recognising the genuine need this proposal addresses while concluding that a treasury commitment of this scale is not appropriate before the governance foundations it depends on have been established.\nRationale\nThe problem is real, the design is credible \nCardano's open source infrastructure does face the maintainer concentration and funding continuity risks the proposal describes, and the data-driven selection model is a meaningful improvement over how previous maintainer programs have operated. Yoroi does not question the technical or institutional thinking behind the dOSPO and OMF framework, nor the proposer's firsthand experience of where earlier efforts failed.\n\n\nExecution concentration is the core concern \nThe program's governance independence is its primary value proposition, but for the first six months it rests entirely on a single individual operating through a consulting firm. The independent legal entity, the advisory councils, and the published dependency methodology that are supposed to govern all funding decisions do not yet exist at the point of withdrawal. Twelve million ADA over 36 months is a significant commitment to make before those foundations are in place.\n\n\nTreasury resources should follow demonstrated foundations, not precede them \nYoroi would be more supportive of a scoped first phase covering entity formation, council constitution, and the initial dependency audit, with a follow-on withdrawal once the governance infrastructure is operational and the first retainer selections have been made under the published rubric. Committing the full program budget before any of that has been proven is not a responsible use of treasury resources at this stage.\nConclusion\nYoroi acknowledges the work behind this proposal and the problem it is designed to address. Our NO vote is not a rejection of the dOSPO model; it is a considered view on sequencing and proportionality. We would welcome a resubmission structured around a first phase that allows the community to evaluate the governance foundations before committing at this scale, and we hope to be in a position to support a more targeted proposal in a future cycle.\n"
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}