As part of Intersect’s role in supporting constitutional governance and fostering transparency across the ecosystem, we’re sharing a recent learning that emerged through collaborative review.

Over the past month, a community discussion prompted closer observation of a delegation pattern involving ada held in custody via the Copper platform and how it may have affected the Intersect-led Cardano Budget Process, and past on-chain governance actions. Working together with all involved, we have come to understand, clarify, and resolve the underlying issue. 

What was observed

As part of the user interface, the Copper custodian allowed users to select a DRep to represent governance stake. Under Copper’s previous implementation, if a user left the DRep delegation field blank, which may have been an intent to abstain, the system would default to Yuta as Copper’s DRep. This auto-delegation was not visible in the user interface, meaning that some users may have unintentionally had their ada delegated to DRep Yuta.

Upon learning about the issue, DRep Yuta contacted Copper customer support to express his desire to not receive delegation in this way and Intersect offered technical support to the company if desired. Copper proactively address it, and the issue has now been rectified and corrected by Copper by setting undelegated customer stake to abstain. We appreciate the openness and collaboration shown by both Copper and Yuta in helping to clarify the issue and improve the system for the future.

Did it affect any past outcomes?

Intersect reviewed both on-chain governance actions and off-chain polling conducted through Ekklesia to understand whether this delegation behavior had a material impact on outcomes of the Budget process.

For governance actions submitted on-chain, we can confirm that no proposals which were approved would have been rejected if this delegation issue had not occurred. Similarly, for the off-chain signalling exercises facilitated via Ekklesia, the voting behavior linked to the Copper platform did not alter the final outcome or consensus reached.

That said, we did identify the potential of a small number of proposals in the off-chain Ekklesia poll that did not pass and might have met their thresholds if the affected ada had abstained or been delegated differently. 

Supporting proposers to resubmit

In recognition of this, Intersect invites the impacted proposers to resubmit their proposals directly on-chain. Should they choose to do so, we will actively support them both procedurally and financially. This can include depositing the 100,000 ada required to post a new Info Action and serving as their Administrator.

We will be reaching out directly to proposers who may have been impacted.

Looking ahead

This is a valuable example of how Cardano’s governance is maturing through observation, shared responsibility, and continuous improvement. As a community, we are still in the early stages of building the infrastructure and habits of decentralized decision-making. That is why moments like this - where different actors come together to identify an issue and resolve it constructively - are so important. They demonstrate the strong social foundation required to uphold the spirit of Cardano’s Constitution.

Thank you again to everyone who contributed to addressing this matter in good faith. Together, we continue to learn, adapt, and build a more resilient foundation for Cardano’s future.