₳daddy

Cardano. Delegate with me, DRep ID: drep19e3t86jddnsm2qh59tqv6skppnyqm5z5d6de82u5dr8hup7pwq0

@JaromirTesar We do not need 3 nodes

Are 3 alt nodes or adoption more important? Is Cardano Summit or TOKEN2049 important for adoption? Do these events have to be organized by FEs? How much IOG will ask to maintain the Haskell node? We constantly skip the strategy and prioritization steps before funding.

@HMResearchX Apple stock 1987 to 2004

We are building privacy video games before cardano foundation gives us marketing and US institutional adoption. Make it make sense. Can we just do things that put Cardano on the map? For fucks sake. 5 year bear market for what?

Cardano needs a Common Sense Committee.

@JaromirTesar 💯💯💯💯💯 I do think if info actions could do more, they could help structure everything

Cardano governance is too rushed. We just allowed ADA holders to delegate voting power to DReps who vote on funding. In doing so, we skipped all the important steps. Without coordination, context, strategy, and prioritization, we are randomly approving almost all withdrawals.

@HMResearchX Spend money to make money.

$ADA price is disgusting. Keep proposing we spend the Treasury tho. That will fix things. Marketing only.

@v_vukman @CardanoRami Yes, just not the percent people claim that it had

@ada_ddy @CardanoRami Lol, selling 275m + 350m ADA will always impact the token price. What are you talking about?

2025: 275,000,000 $ADA was distributed via governance proposals. 2026: 350,000,000 $ADA will be distributed via governance proposals. $ADA is down 54% against $BTC in the last 12 months.

Hi sir, inflation from treasury withdrawals would be approximately 1% per year if max NCL is utilized. OTC is fairly easy to access, see screenshot below. For comparison, staking reward inflation accounts for approximately 2% per year. I never said it doesn’t have an impact on price, but to say it accounts for the dramatic price decline is just a false narrative and nobody could prove it if it was true. A MAXIUM 1% inflation from treasury withdrawals invested in ourselves at random intervals is not going to account for 75%, 50%, 25% or even a 10% price decline relative to the previous cycle top. Sorry, that’s not how that works. We do need to be careful with how we spend, which is why I still think 250mil NCL is a good goal

Nobody keeps ADA if it's for development or any other expenditure, because nobody accepts ADA for payment, so we can assume all that ADA was sold to somebody, dragging the price down. 625M, compared to 45B, represents more than 1% of the total supply, and if that amount ends up in sell orders regardless of the rail (I highly doubt that grant recipients went to OTC desks to sell), it's significant sell pressure. And especially in market conditions when there's low organic demand, like now. So yes, selling ADA from the treasury definitely affects the price, but I agree it's not the sole reason why we're falling behind. Does anyone remember @Polkadot that was around us in 2021? They fell behind primarily due to substantial treasury withdrawals.

@benjamincowen Ben, if it’s not in a tweet or making headline news it doesn’t exist

Imagine thinking that rocket science/propulsion is not published anywhere

@GrantCardone Property taxes should only be levied on income producing properties. Not residential, owner occupied housing, as the properties don't generate income to pay the tax.

@MicheleHarmonic @pebble_lang Would Pebble be the highest priority in this proposal, or do you need Gerolomo simultaneously?

Here is how real developers on Cardano (as you can see by the 🪏) perceive @pebble_lang Please go vote YES for the pebble proposal 🙏😁

By the way, my answer to the next simple question, "Should Cardano skip Singapore Token 2049?" is NO. With Dubai Token 2049 cancelled, there's certainly a lot of attention on Singapore Token 2049. I don't think skipping it would be good, either in the short or long term. I think many people would agree with this. But...The focus of disagreement regarding this governance action will probably be on how the event is run and the cost. I'm still neutral; let's continue the discussion🙏

@HMResearchX Agreed sir

$ADA UNDERPERFORMING AGAIN… The whole cycle, just underperforming. If you guys are serious about making Cardano succeed. The community better start focusing on price. Before it’s too late. And it’s almost too late now

@InputEndorsers I know they demo’d a few things too. It is exciting and I am optimistic. But I was reading Pi’s rational and it seems it’s going to be quite the challenge.

@ada_ddy And this

Aiken did more for adoption than throwing money at Win-Win Loxe dispute resolution, hotel reservation systems, health platforms, DLT360 and many other adoption projects I see a more realistic path towards adoption through node diversity and better smart contract languages

This really just sounds like you’re jealous of the billionaire for not paying his fair share of taxes… It’s totally right for you to point out what you think is righteous and what isn’t, but you also said you were going to provide data and you didn’t. Of course there are obvious flaws with how Catalyst and treasury withdraws operate. And people got $$ they shouldn’t have or never lived up to their promises. That is governance in a nut shell. If you really want to make things right, focus on making governance lean and conservative. That way there’s less to exploit. You can’t say everyone who works for a profit is greedy and therefore bad for the ecosystem. Calling people out for organizing to procure funding (which you have no data for) is fair, but it reads as if these people or enemies of Cardano. And I HIGHLY disagree with that. Pure extraction for the sake of extraction is wrong and is bad for the ecosystem. But the people and organizations mentioned above are not in this for pure extraction. They have raised the bar for Cardano in one way or another.

Yes, the gap needs to be bridged somehow. And you need a central authority to get this done. I can guarantee you, people want familiarity. If I feel like I’m using a bank, that’s a win. And then as you said, PayAda’s control becomes thinned out. It’s like google with android. I’d love to see how Midnight can be incorporated with dust for near 0 fees and adding on privacy

I get your point — and honestly, I agree with the philosophy. In an ideal world, payments on Cardano should be fully decentralized, standard-driven, and handled directly between wallets — not dependent on platforms like ours. That’s exactly why things like CIP-13 and especially the direction of CIP-0157 are so important. A solid, widely adopted payment URI standard could remove a lot of friction and make native, wallet-to-wallet payments seamless. Where I see Payada fitting in (at least today): We’re not trying to replace that vision — we’re trying to bridge the gap while it’s not there yet. Right now: standards are still evolving wallet support is fragmented UX is inconsistent (especially mobile) So what we built is more of a UX layer on top: 👉 simple links 👉 payment detection 👉 optional access delivery Long term, I actually think the best outcome is: Platforms like ours become thinner… and standards like CIP-0157 do the heavy lifting. If wallets natively support rich payment requests (tokens, metadata, references, etc.), then a lot of what we do today becomes simpler — or even unnecessary. And honestly, that would be a good thing. Would love to hear your take on where you think the balance should be between: pure protocol-level solutions and UX layers like ours in the meantime

I’ve been in this space since 2019, starting as an SPO. Back then, you could already see certain figures positioning themselves as “voices” of the ecosystem — people who knew how to explain things well and rally the community behind them. But over time, something started to bother me more and more. It feels like within Cardano, only a small group decides what gets attention. Projects get talked about, supported, and promoted… but mostly when they’re backed or pushed by those same voices. Meanwhile, builders — real builders — who are actually trying to create utility for everyday users often get ignored. Not criticized. Not challenged. Just… not even looked at. And that’s the part that concerns me. We built Payada for the average user. No code. No complexity. Just simple payment and access links that anyone can use. We even launched a TRY campaign where people can test it in under 5 minutes and receive 5 ADA back. And still… almost no activity. Not even curiosity. Not even a simple “let’s try this and see.” It makes me wonder — is the issue visibility? Or is it that the ecosystem has become too dependent on influencers to validate what’s worth attention? Because let’s be honest: many of those influencers expect to be paid. And if something isn’t sponsored, it often doesn’t exist. So where does that leave builders who are just trying to create real utility? Is Cardano not ready yet for simple, user-focused tools? Or are we just not looking in the right places anymore? I’m not posting this out of frustration, but out of genuine concern. Because if real builders aren’t seen or tested… we risk building an ecosystem that talks a lot — but uses very little. We’re going to keep building — with or without Cardano. We already have a working product. Don’t let that go to waste. Curious to hear your thoughts. #cardano #cardanocommunity #ada #payada

@decypher_xyz Agree, I’d vote yes if it was half the sum they are looking for

➡️ On the Cardano Summit Debate: 1. Yes, going to Token2049 in Singapore this year is a (very) significant presence for Cardano, as it will be the biggest crypto event of the year. 2. If the community wants Cardano to be able to make more connections and expand its horizons, events like this are great to connect builders, stakeholders, institutions and VCs 3. Feels like the Cardano Foundation should not be asking for basically the whole amount of money to make the Summit, but rather they should be the ones putting in their money - especially as they even had a profit from last year of 330k according the proposal deck 🤔 4. The community would gladly accept a middle ground proposal which reduced the request and expending to a reasonable basis Just my 2 cents on the matter. I haven’t read everything on the proposal, but it feels to me like this will be very divisive. Even if the proposal passes, it certainly won’t look good for the CF to not have a near unanimous result. This is the kind of stuff that NEEDS a wide consensus for it to be successful and positive for the community.

This deserves atleast a curious eye

Look at how much was actually dispersed. And then how do even know how much was sold on the open market? If you do these things properly (over counter offers, limit ordering, volume ratio) price impact is minimal. Price really only moves when it’s low volume and you full send market sell. ADA dropping down the CMC is not completely driven from treasury expenditures. In fact, it’s less that a 1% inflation of the circulating supply if you maxed out NCL

I believe 272m of the 275m was used, is that incorrect? And we do know a good portion of the 350m will be used this year, it’s not hard to figure that. “It’s had very little impact on $ada price” - we all heard the same thing when $ada went from the 6th spot to the 7th spot. Then the 7th spot to the 8th spot. Then 8th spot to the 9th spot. Then 9th to 10th. Then 10th to 11th. Ada is now the 12th biggest marketcap. Should we continue next year as well?