Cardano's real battle in the 50m ADA plan

Within the Cardano community, a fierce debate broke out within the Cardano community over a proposal to allocate 50 million ADA to build Stablecoin liquidity and expand the Defi Ecosystem.

Supporters argue that the fund can strengthen adoption, but deep disagreements have emerged about who should manage financial spending and how decisions should be made.

Treasury uses trigger governance concerns

Jane, a well-known Cardano supporter, called for careful and step-by-step allocations, claiming that funding one protocol at a time would prevent dilution and make the results measurable.

They further opposed the idea of ​​establishing an unelected advisory committee, and instead supported the direct community vote for funding allocation.

Related: Even if grayscale ETF inclusion is live, ADA prices will drop with the sale of 530m whales

Hoskinson warns that direct democracy can paralyze development

Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson pushed back the proposals strongly, warning that direct democracy against the Treasury decision would be confusing.

He painted pictures from past experiences and described Cardano's previous budget processes as messy, contradictory and often infeasible.

According to Hoskinson, giving the community any decisions will risk turning Defi development into a popularity contest, preventing serious projects from taking part.

Instead, Hoskinson pointed out the need for delegated authority, which is entrusted with decision-making authority to an experienced individual or group, but remains interchangeable for accountability. He argued that without such a structure, Cardano would struggle to expand adoption, marketing and debt efforts.

Related: As Hoskinson stepped in with support, the Ergo HTX Registration Committee deepens

Community opposes centralization

Not all community members are sure. Pointing out flaws in past governance processes, particularly problems within intersecting governance structures, suggesting that obstacles are due to leadership gaps rather than community shortcomings.

Others highlighted the emphasis on an unbiased voting model, whether or not it should be central to Cardano's identity, whether or not it should be central to Cardano's identity, based on ADA Holdings. Jane admits that direct democracy can be troubling, which provides fairness and inclusiveness.

Critics of the delegated model were concerned about commissioning unselected or pseudonymous individuals with key financial decisions, especially if a track record of both traditional and debt has not been proven.

Cardano Governance at the Crossroads

This argument shows continuous tension within Cardano, as it aims to balance decentralized ideals with the actual need for efficient governance.

Hoskinson said even individuals who received the resource struggle under the current structure and will raise questions about whether small players can significantly affect the outcome.