Perhaps this has already been settled in previous threads or voted proposals, but since I raised it in the Spearbit Labs candidacy thread I will also mention it here so it can be properly addressed without hijacking another thread.
The DAO Constitution as it is written seems to, by my interpretation, allow for “members” as in single individuals, but there is no mention or clear implied allowance for whole organizations being “members”.
My interpretation of the DAO Constitution is that it is fine and proper for any individual to represent any organization as a candidate for the security council, but that it is only allowed for a single identifiable and KYC’able individual to be a candidate, not a whole organization all at once. My reasons for this are 3:
-
Overall language
The overall language regarding the security council in the DAO Constitution clearly numbers the members as 6 per cohort, implying that each member represents just one individual, and not a plurality of “sub-members” who each take part (in some undefined way) in the cohort. -
Organizations and candidates are differentiated in the independence section
Here is also a relevant section, emphasis mine:
As a matter of best practice for maintaining an independent Security Council, no single organization should be overly represented in the Security Council. In particular, **there should not be more than 3 candidates associated with a single entity or group of entities being elected to the Security Council**, thereby ensuring that there will be no single entity or group of entities able to control or even veto a Security Council vote.
Note here the clear separation between “candidates”, being the elected members of the council, from “entity or group of entities”, such as an organization. -
Ethical requirements on candidates would be unenforceable with regards to organizations
That section is followed by another:
Furthermore, no candidate with conflicts of interest that would prevent them from acting in the best interests of the ArbitrumDAO, Governed Chains and/or The Arbitrum Foundation should be elected to the Security Council. Potential conflicts of interest could be, but are not limited to, affiliations with direct Arbitrum competitors, proven histories of exploiting projects and others.
In my opinion this becomes basically unenforceable, if an organization of multiple individuals can be considered a “candidate” for the council.