{
  "@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 vote in favour of continued funding for Catalyst. It has been battle tested and iterated upon over 13 completed funds and is still the best way to fund smaller teams and novel projects in the Cardano ecosystem. Even though treasury withdrawals are now available it would be unreasonable to burden small teams and projects with the 100,000 ada deposit and in turn, DReps and CC who would be burdened with an increased workload by funnelling every conceivable funding proposal to the treasury. Catalyst provides a suitable pathway and milestone-based funding criteria, allowing smaller scale teams and projects to focus on building rather than bureaucracy. Vigilance is still required to ensure that projects aren’t “double-dipping” and accessing funds through both Catalyst and the treasury for the same development items.\n\nAs 1 of 15 proposals in this series of 39 treasury withdrawal governance actions that I had previously voted for during the budget reconciliation process via Ekklesia I vote YES. In keeping with previous voting intentions of keeping total treasury withdrawal expenditure below 250 million ada I have focussed my selections on core development and essential maintenance of community tooling as we enter this critical period of the market cycle. I have tried to balance between large project asks and smaller but still very essential maintenance for existing tooling, with projects that have a proven track record."
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}