Petition: Project Catalyst dcfund Missing an Opportunity of a Lifetime

For a reference I have been taking part of Project Catalyst since fund1 and have watched the process unfold and diehard community members emerge. I have been one of the loudest and most outspoken people in fund1 and fund2 as I witnessed things that seemed out of line with what I thought Cardano stood for, and when I saw inequalities and opportunities in the process.

All that being said, now is the time I feel I must really get loud and bring attention to one of the biggest opportunities Cardano and the ecosystem is about to miss out on. The challenge of fund1 and fund2 is “How do we encourage developers and entrepreneurs to build businesses and applications on top of Cardano in the next six months?”

That has been our mission since August 12th(fund1), but in fund1 Project Catalyst didn’t give out 1 ADA in funding to the winning proposals, and offered no help to those projects afterward. They were just invited to go through the whole process again and wait another 8+ weeks to maybe get funding.

Then fund2 starts with the same mission of encouraging DEVs and Entrepreneurs to build things on Cardano, and though they are giving out some funding this time to help accomplish the mission, the amount they are giving out ($250,000) is a drop in the bucket of what they have in the account now, and unrealistic as it relates to the mission…

With Goguen in the near future, and every other blockchain kicking Cardano’s ass when it comes to use cases, now is the time to use dcfunds for innovation. With $8,000,000 in funds now and $80,000,000 to come and be given out this year, it does not make sense to only give out $250,000 during fund2.

During fund2 while there is a low number of proposals compared the amount of dcfunds is a great time to fund all the proposals that get more YES votes than No’s. During fund2 you have some of the most loyal fans of Cardano and early adopters who will try their hardest to deliver positive results.

I am calling on the community to stand up and let dcfund know that we want to support more than $250,000 worth of projects in fund2!

What do you think would do more good for Cardano,

  1. Five to eight proposals get funded in fund2 and a few make something in time for people to use when Goguen is live, and the dcfund has $8million dollars in it.


  1. Fifty to sixty proposals get funded in fund2 and there are 20 to 30 different things for people to use when Goguen is live, and the dcfund has maybe $5million dollars in it.

Help shape the near future of Cardano’s ecosystem and adoption. Now is not the time to sit on dcfunds, while the community is eager to build and Goguen is so close, now is the time to use dcfunds to catapult Cadano above the other blockchains by showing them lots of cool new things they can do on it.

By time fund3 ends and gives out whatever funds are available in it, months will have gone by that teams in fund2 could have had things built and ready for people to use had they got funding in fund2.

Please support my petition by sharing it, commenting on it, however you can think that could influence the Project Catalyst team and dcfund rule makers. Let’s not miss an opportunity to take Cardano to the next level while there is already $8million in the bank.

“How do we encourage developers and entrepreneurs to build businesses and applications on top of Cardano in the next six months?” By giving them funds to do the job!



You could run a poll…


Changing the rules after they are set in the start its a bit hard, I agree that is a low value and we can get a bit more, but we have to consider we are starting and this bring new problems. Me and others are more then 1 year compiling versions of the network node, we see months have gone and we still seeing a lot of things need to improve for SPOs, as a small one since from beginning i know how bad was and still is. The thing is 1 or 2 months for a next fund 3 round will not make much difference, but this need clarification.

I also a Community Advisor, i read all proposal and gave advice as many as possible, but there is proposals that are not ready and should not be funded, to me opening a budget in a early stage its not too good at same time. But for this we should have a better explanation about how the fund mechanics will work, if the rules for YES and NO will be applicable like in this video.

Again this is my perception and the community should vote in this petition too.

To me is missing clarifications in other points like:
-Dates, and rules for the next fund rounds.
-How we will define the next challenge?
-Proposals that was not able to get funds in fund2, will be able to re submit in fund3?

I think this is also important.


I don’t think I agree with funding all yes proposals but I do agree with increasing the amount awarded to winning proposals and/or increasing the number of proposals that will be funded.

1 Like

Help shape the near future of Cardano’s ecosystem and adoption.

I’d rather help shape the long-term future of Cardano; and we can’t do that if we blow the entire fund right at the start on the very first round of ideas…

Also, with k having been set so low to start, and d taking so many months to decrement nice and slow, it’s clear that Cardano is taking a “baby steps first” approach… So I say we should be patient and learn to crawl before trying to sprint… We’ll be sprinting in no-time anyway, and at least we’ll be a lot less likely to pull a muscle (to belabor the metaphor) if we warm-up first…


If ADA holders(people with ADA) vote YES enough for an idea there must be enough community memebrs that want that for the ecosystem. And if the treasury has funds now that could support that YES proposal than it should get funded. It was ADA voting, and if a YES proposal that means a big part of the community wants it. So lets start building it now while there is more than enough funds. And more funds will be added so the only things we would be doing is instead of hording ADA in the dcfund and telling people come back try again maybe get some next time, we would could use more and be supporting our early adobters and growing the ecosytem. What good does it do Cardano to hold millions of dollars worth of ADA in dcfunds when pinoeers are knocking on the door?

1 Like

I am largely with CheeseStake.

I have been following fund 2 closely and even have some proposals of my own that I did not submit since timing and fund parameters weren’t fitting.

I think for the near future it is important that the Cardano ecosystem gets a funding vehicle that can support serious technology investment. Fund 2 wasn’t that and that is ok. We aren’t in a build it and they will come world so we will have to not only attract developers (fund2 goal) but also fund things that will attract end users at large (fund3 goal?)
IMO it would be meaningful to just start fund 3 soon but doing changes to fund 2 does not make sense.

My own 2¢

1 Like

“We want to help the unbanked, so we are going to sit on millions of dollars of ADA and talk about!” Cardano

From what I understand Fund 1 has not been funded. Fund 2 has not been voted on yet and the amount available means lots of projects will miss out or be under funded.


I got ada, how do I vote on the proposals?


The app is not ready for voting yet.

Thanks Chris,

So I don’t have act on the above discussion just yet.


Well the idea is that the community do. I would read the thread again.

At the very least, the fund2 amount of $250k can be doubled to $500k and there will still be plenty of funds left in the Treasury and a lot more projects started


I agree. 250K is just too small to even spend discussing


Hi all,

I generally agree, but I’d think to modify it so things are flexible along 2 dimensions. I’d suggest the next funding round have a higher quantity of available funds, but only give to projects that meet a criteria scale per funding request. It is probably too hard to change an existing round, the point of this one being to test out the voting system and get a few projects funded.

Set aside 1 or 2 million dollars worth of ada with set funding sizes. Scaling approval requirements apply with 55% yes votes for 25k, 60% for 50k and 65% for 100k proposals to set a higher level of agreement for larger funding requests. As much as is approved is what gets used, if that’s only 500k or the full 2 million, then that’s what happens…

Perhaps add an easy 12.5k mini grant at a 50% threshold and a jumbo option to apply for 200k, buy you’d need 70% approval. This is flexible to help small projects and capable of creating larger projects, but it’d be a lot harder to get the big dollars with a higher level of agreement from the community.

Funding is flexible too and if there are not enough approved ideas, then less money is spent, but there is an upper limit. If we hit that limit then we could have a run off election to select which projects proceed with some idea of fixed sizes like 10 tiny grants and 3 jumbos with whatever maths works to create sensible limits based on the pool of ‘over approved’ projects that hit the voting threshold.


It will be interesting to see how the funding goes there is not much you can do with that figure across projects.