Anchor document

{
  "@context": {
    "CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
    "authors": {
      "@container": "@set",
      "@context": {
        "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
        "witness": {
          "@context": {
            "publicKey": "CIP100:publicKey",
            "signature": "CIP100:signature",
            "witnessAlgorithm": "CIP100:witnessAlgorithm"
          },
          "@id": "CIP100:witness"
        }
      },
      "@id": "CIP100:authors"
    },
    "body": {
      "@context": {
        "comment": "CIP100:comment",
        "externalUpdates": {
          "@context": {
            "title": "CIP100:update-title",
            "uri": "CIP100:uri"
          },
          "@id": "CIP100:externalUpdates"
        },
        "references": {
          "@container": "@set",
          "@context": {
            "GovernanceMetadata": "CIP100:GovernanceMetadataReference",
            "Other": "CIP100:OtherReference",
            "label": "CIP100:reference-label",
            "referenceHash": {
              "@context": {
                "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
                "hashDigest": "CIP100:hashDigest"
              },
              "@id": "CIP100:referenceHash"
            },
            "uri": "CIP100:reference-uri"
          },
          "@id": "CIP100:references"
        }
      },
      "@id": "CIP100:body"
    },
    "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm"
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256",
  "body": {
    "comment": "I have to vote NO on this proposal for a few reasons:\n\n1) My personal NCL has been met, and I will not be approving any more spending for research/building related proposals. Only serious on chain tx volume and financial benefit proposals to the blockchain would get me to reassess.\n\n2) I don't support the idea of taking away control from DReps when it comes to deciding funding. Proposals like this create middle men, which I feel are unnecessary. I would rather have proposals with real merit submit for funding through either the Intersect budget process, or via an on chain GA.\n\n3) It is unclear even within this proposal whether or not there is an overlap of Open Source funding:\n\nFor transparency: this proposal is informed by lessons learned from the OSC Paid Open Source Model, which received Cardano ecosystem treasury funding through the Open Source Committee, which went to INtersect MBO directly, not directly to Christian Taylor personally or nor did he receive any allocation of that treasury funding directly or indirectly. This new budget is intended to replace and evolve that prior work through a more decentralized structure.\n\nIs the Intersect Open Source Committee still in effect? Is this proposal designed to (if passed) replace that committee and its funding by using this as a signal of voters wishes to end that committee? There are not clear details whether Intersect will end the Open Source Committee if this budget passes, or if this discussion was even had with Intersect.\n\nI am not interested in double funding open source tooling on Cardano, so I would appreciate a clear breakdown of what is expected here and what is being assumed by the proposer."
  }
}