The Community Wants to Know: Episode 1 [Transcript]

Executive Summary: An unfiltered, hour-long accountability session with one of the earliest pioneer dReps. We dive into why a million-ADA representative lost 70% of their power and why they now view the system as “corrupt.”

Key Revelations:

  • On Motivation: The guest admitted: "I don’t want to be a dRep… I’m just like, nah, f** this. I don’t care."*
  • On the 70M ADA Budget: They called those who voted ‘Yes’ "f ing sheeple"* and argued the founding entities should already be doing this work with original funding.
  • On Transparency: Admitted to voting ‘Yes’ on budget limits simply because they “like even numbers.”
  • On Conflict of Interest: Confirmed they only voted on one Treasury withdrawal—their own project—stating it would be “weird” not to vote for themselves.

The Turning Point: The guest revealed that their disillusionment began at the Nairobi constitutional signing, claiming promises of “representation for the underrepresented” (India, Philippines, etc.) were never kept.

THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO KNOW: EPISODE 1

Guest: drep1yt7vr9r0ay4h7fagkgwkvwdll3etupc40vn5tmeqf46x0sq63mk3a (Pioneer dRep)
Topic: Accountability, Participation, and the “Corrupt” System

Interviewer: Good morning, good afternoon, Cardano. Today we are looking into a dRep who is one of the earliest pioneers of the Voltaire era, registered before the Constitution was even passed. At his peak, he had nearly 1 million ADA in delegation from 98 delegators globally. Today, we ask the hard questions: How and why has he acted this way? The community wants to know. Welcome.

dRep: Hey dude, can you hear me? Glad to be here. I’m honored to be your first guest. Shoot away, man.

Interviewer: First question. When you registered as a dRep, what was your experience on the technical side?

dRep: At the time, it was mostly desktop. I used Eternl wallet, and from what I remember, it was a pain in the ass. I used the default Cardano governance website. I had to try the transaction half a dozen times before the 500 ADA deposit went through. I was actually concerned I’d just lost 500 ADA and wouldn’t even be a dRep.

Interviewer: I’m one of your delegators; I trusted you with my ADA. Your current profile motivation says: “I don’t want to be a dRep, but I have delegators, so I’m obligated to stay.” Is that really how you feel?

dRep: That’s my updated profile. The original one was professional—looked like a f***ing LinkedIn page with my graduation credentials and resume. But I updated it recently because I’m no longer active. My current objective is that I believe this whole process is corrupt. I stand my ground as one of the few uncompromised by greed and politics.

Interviewer: You had 1 million ADA; now you have 292k. A 70% drop. You still have 54 delegators. Do they believe in you, or are they just there for the rewards?

dRep: They’re just there for the rewards, dude. Most don’t even have ADA anymore if you look at the data. They aren’t updated on governance; they don’t care. I can’t even reach them. I used to know them by name, but they don’t even talk to me anymore.

Interviewer: Your participation rate is 12.9%. Out of 88 actions, you only voted on 11. What happened?

dRep: I was active in the first few months. Then the sentiment dropped. Nobody was replying to me. I felt, what is the point of me voting when nobody gives a s***? I got lazy with rationales, too. Most of the time I just post them on X because nobody looks at the official governance tools anyway.

Interviewer: Let’s talk about a critical vote. The 70 Million ADA Critical Integrations Budget proposed by the “Pentad” (IOG, CF, Emurgo, Intersect, and Midnight). You voted NO and wrote: "You all are f*ing sheeple." Who are you calling sheeple?

dRep: Generally, everybody saying “Yes” without defending it. I was close friends with Cardano Whale, and we shared the same sentiment. The founding entities shouldn’t exist in this capacity anymore. They raised money to create Cardano in the first place—why do we have to pay them extra to do the job they were already funded to do?

Interviewer: Why didn’t you try to convince other dReps to change their minds?

dRep: I tried on X! I just kept being told: “This is the time for unity.” That’s a stupid argument. People just want to move forward instead of addressing issues. I’m partially to blame because I signed the Constitution with that same mindset—that we’d fix things as we go. It didn’t work. It made everything worse. Now, people just ignore me.

Interviewer: On the New Constitution, you voted NO and said: "Last f** you to the elites."* Who are the elites?

dRep: The founding entities, dude. And everyone who goes along with them. They’re part of a club I wasn’t invited to because I didn’t play the f***ing game.

Interviewer: You voted YES on the Cardano Ikigai proposal, saying “This is why we joined Cardano.” But two months later, you voted NO on the Constitution. Why the shift?

dRep: Because of the Nairobi convention. We were promised representation for developing countries like India and the Philippines. Charles [Hoskinson] assured us on a call that underrepresented people would have a voice. Two months later, everything was back to normal. Nothing changed. Same people getting funded. I haven’t even read the revised versions of the Constitution anymore. I’ve accepted they’ll just do what they want.

Interviewer: On the Net Change Limit (NCL), you voted YES on one and NO on another. Your rationale for the 250M limit was: “I like even numbers.” Was that a joke?

dRep: It was drama on my X page. 350M was too much fing money; it would drop the price of ADA. But since nobody was interacting with my posts or asking me questions, I figured I’d write whatever the f I want since nobody is reading it. Except you—look, somebody actually read my s*** today.

Interviewer: I’m holding you accountable because nobody else is. You also voted YES on the Discover Cardano marketing proposal. Was that because you were part of the team?

dRep: Yes, obviously. I worked on it. Why would I not vote on it? If people had an issue with it, they could delegate away—but they didn’t.

Interviewer: Why not vote on other treasury withdrawals?

dRep: I didn’t see the point. Governance is a popularity contest. I realized that late. If I argued or voted ‘No’ on others, it might hurt my own funding. So the best thing to do was simply not vote on anything so people couldn’t say s***.

Interviewer: You’ve been here since 2020 because of Cardano Whale. How has the community changed?

dRep: It shifted from community-centric to specific-people-centric. The “Pentad” and chosen projects get funded over and over. I expected small projects from Africa or the Philippines to build here. That’s not what’s happening.

Interviewer: What do you think about dRep payments?

dRep: I was the first to say this: payments should be optional and built into the wallet. Your delegators should choose to pay you from their rewards, not the treasury. If it’s really decentralized, there shouldn’t be a centralized source of income.

Interviewer: And the Constitutional Committee (CC)?

dRep: The CC shouldn’t even exist. Me and Whale came up with a one-page Constitution years ago. Minimum interference, minimum bureaucracy. The current one is so ambiguous it only benefits American lawyers. It’s too f***ed up because people were looking for loopholes instead of guardrails. We rushed it because people feared the SEC, and now governance is going to hell because not enough people are participating.

Interviewer: Final question. Will you be actively participating as a dRep going forward?

dRep: At the moment, not really.

Interviewer: Because I chose you as my dRep and you aren’t participating, I will be shifting my delegation to “No Confidence” on all future actions.

dRep: I 100% agree with you. Yeah, you should do that.

Interviewer: That’s it for today. We have the numbers and the facts. You can hide behind a dRep ID, but not your voting record. The seat is empty for now, but not for long. Who is next? THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO KNOW. Good day, Cardano.
Links - The Community Wants to Know: A New Transparency Series for dReps & CC
X space link - https://x.com/silversoul8668/status/2025524726949695944?s=20
X Thread link - https://x.com/silversoul8668/status/2025861512838193598?s=20

2 Likes

This is a summary of the interview from the podcast series “The Community Wants to Know” features an early dRep who registered during the pioneer Voltaire Era and at his peak held nearly 1 million ADA in delegation. The discussion explores his technical experiences, his shift in motivation, and his critiques of the current Cardano governance system.

Registration and Background

The dRep described the initial registration process as technically difficult, requiring multiple attempts through a desktop wallet before his 500 ADA deposit was successfully processed. Originally drawn to Cardano in 2020 by the values of “Cardano Whale,” he moved his holdings from Luna, believing Cardano was a community-focused project that could survive independently of its founding entities.

Participation and Engagement Trends

Over time, the guest’s active involvement and delegation numbers significantly declined:

  • Delegation Drop: His ADA delegation fell from 1 million to approximately 292,000, a 70% decrease.
  • Low Participation: He has voted on only 11 out of 88 governance actions (a 12.9% rate) and provided rationales for roughly half of those votes.
  • Delegator Sentiment: He believes his remaining delegators are largely inactive and only remain for staking rewards, noting that many no longer engage with him.

Governance Critiques and Voting Rationales

The interview highlights a deep disillusionment with the current governance process, which the guest now views as a “popularity contest” rather than a system of accountability. Key points of contention include:

  • Institutional Funding: He voted “No” on the 70 million ADA budget for founding entities, arguing they should have completed their work with the funds raised during Cardano’s inception.
  • The Interim Constitution: Although he signed the original document, he now expresses regret. He claims that promises made by Charles Hoskinson regarding increased representation for developing countries like India and the Philippines have not been fulfilled.
  • Ambiguity: He criticizes the current constitution as being too complex and legally ambiguous, suggesting it favors American legal perspectives and should have been a much simpler document focused on technical guard rails.

Philosophical Stance on Payments and the CC

The dRep advocates for a minimalist governance model:

  • dRep Payments: He argues that payments should be optional donations from delegators via wallet systems rather than being funded by the treasury.
  • Constitutional Committee (CC): He believes the CC should not exist and favors a one-page constitution that ensures “minimum governance, minimum interference, [and] minimum bureaucracy”.

Conclusion

At the close of the interview, the dRep stated he will not be actively participating in governance moving forward. In response, the interviewer announced their intention to shift their ADA delegation to “no confidence” for all upcoming governance actions.

1 Like