Rationale: Voting No due to a mismatch between the proposal description and the payment request.
The amount requested (4,500 USDRIF) corresponds to Milestone 4, but the proposal is labeled as Milestone 3, which has already been funded. For clarity and auditability, the milestone information should match the intended payment request.
The work delivered appears satisfactory, and I would support a corrected resubmission.
While the team has demonstrated GTM activity, communications efforts, and governance participation, I do not believe the milestone provides sufficient evidence of measurable ecosystem impact. The updated Collective guidelines place strong emphasis on verifiable on chain outcomes such as TVL growth, active wallets, transactions, and user adoption.
Rationale: I support this proposal. Moving from a competitive ranking system to a threshold based model creates healthier incentives for delegates, encouraging meaningful governance participation rather than competition over metrics.
While the reduced rewards may lower motivation for some delegates, I believe the collaborative structure and clearer alignment with governance quality outweigh this drawback