Cardano’s Project Catalyst is looking for a new Fund operator. 

IOG has applied to run the 10th edition of Project Catalyst’s Fund. 

IOG’s inclusion has raised alarms, with community members accusing the team of stealing funds, compelling Project Catalyst’s product manager to respond. 

Cardano’s Project Catalyst is currently accepting proposals for who will run the 10th edition of its fund and take responsibility for maintaining the accelerator program. The campaign has garnered proposals from community builders, including Cardano’s very own IOG. 

As part of its proposal, IOG has requested 2.14 million ADA or $700,000 to maintain fund operations and ensure Project Catalyst runs smoothly. The company promises to facilitate Catalyst’s infrastructure and provide deliverables such as progress reports, evaluations, etc. 

Instead of receiving praise, IOG’s proposal has raised alarms. Community members are accusing the company of siphoning treasury funds and scrutinizing the company’s demands for running a community-funded accelerator program. 

IOG Clears the Air

In the wake of the growing concerns surrounding the IOG’s proposal, Daniel Ribar, Product Manager at Project Catalyst, dispelled all allegations of the company stealing funds from the treasury, noting that IOG has a standing policy not to participate in Catalyst Voting.

Ribar clarified that the Catalyst program didn’t run on air and needed considerable resources. IOG’s inclusion in the campaign builds on the team’s commitment to be held to the same standards as any other entity. This means having clear accountability on deliverables, providing evaluation reports, and potentially being fired for underperformance. 

The accusations against IOG emerged because the handover to the next Catalyst operator is set for October 2023, leading to concerns about the practicality of the Catalyst Team’s demands. Some members accused the core team of staying hush, so no competition forms and that IOG prevails in the voting stage taking place in September. 

However, Ribar asserted that the team published the campaign a month ago, giving ample time and opportunity for applicants to submit their proposals, ensuring a competitive and transparent process. 

While Ribar addressed many of the concerns raised by the community, it’s worth noting that some issues were valid and needed clarification. 

Were the Concerns Valid? 

Given IOG’s status in the Cardano ecosystem, users worry that voting for any proposal other than IOG’s could impede the availability of future funds. This fear stems from IOG’s request for three disbursements of 2,140,000 ADA, drawn from each respective fund’s launch, to cover operational costs in its proposal. 

Some users also found the Catalyst Operator proposal requirements vague, leading to uncertainty and potential bias. The official briefing from Project Catalyst called for detailed descriptions of how the proposers would handle day-to-day operations, ensure accountability, and communicate their outputs. Surprisingly, only IOG’s proposal aligned precisely with these demands, fueling the controversy and concerns.

Still, despite the concerns, some community members favored IOG running Project Catalyst, recognizing the team’s need for funding to sustain the program’s operations. 

On the Flipside

Project Catalyst’s 10th Fund is the largest to date, with 50 million ADA or $16 million allocated to projects that address the challenges it has set. 

Why This Matters

The Cardano community considers the vote for Project Catalyst’s next operator as the most important for the accelerator program. 

More on Cardano:

Cardano Bulls Reclaim Crucial Support, Eyeing Retest of $0.38

Read about Project Catalyst: 

What Is Cardano’s Project Catalyst, and Why Is It Important for the Network?