One thing I've felt while serving as a DRep is that the Cardano community is more closed off than you'd think. As someone who interacts with various ecosystems and projects across this market, that feeling only becomes stronger. Many people criticize this ecosystem for being isolated, for having low network activity, and for lacking dApps and builders. They criticize Charles and the major entities too, saying that just having great technology isn't enough anymore and that Cardano needs to actively market its value to the broader market. And yet, when proposals come up that could actually address these issues, the community approaches them extremely conservatively, citing every reason under the sun. On top of that, the community has recently been enthusiastic about investing in node diversity. Personally, in a situation where users, builders, and network activity are all declining, I believe an offline event like the summit, one that puts Cardano on the map, creates partnerships, networking, and potential opportunities is far more important than implementing nodes in new languages. Yet the community and governance decisions are heading in the opposite direction. Even though everyone knows the reality Cardano is facing. I believe I have a sufficient understanding of the decentralization and resilience that node diversity brings to the network. And I respect the contributions of those projects and builders, they absolutely deserve support. But the treasury budget is limited, and it needs to be allocated appropriately based on the situation the ecosystem is in. I'll say it again, there are countless players competing fiercely in this market, and Cardano is falling behind in almost every regard. There may come a point where even opinions like mine no longer hold any meaning. I think my role regarding this proposal ends here. I don't intend to argue any further about the Cardano Summit proposal.