[Non-Constitutional] Arbitrum DAO Delegate Code of Conduct + Formalizing the DAO's Operations

[SEEDGov]

Hello @Entropy,

For the sake of transparency, we would like to mention that we had the opportunity to provide early feedback on the draft of this proposal, and we are pleased to see that the final version is even more robust than the initial one.

At SEEDGov, we understand that every community operates under certain customs, rules, and other social agreements, and it is vital to establish them for Arbitrum DAO. The process applied here is also a strong point of the proposed code of conduct:

Most of this proposal’s content has already been addressed separately in various temperature checks before being codified, similar to how legislative bodies vote on general and specific matters. Thus, this Code of Conduct is the product of the DAO’s previously expressed will.

Our reasons for supporting the implementation of the code of conduct and its soft-enforcement mechanisms align with our stance when voting on previous initiatives: from our perspective, Shielded Voting only for elections, Responsible Voting, Voting Calendarization, and CoI disclosures are good practices to start with, and we can iterate as we encounter new situations.

@Entropy

Best practices of responsible delegates:

• Participation: delegates should make an effort to vote (even if abstain) on all proposals.

• Communication: delegates should clearly communicate their rationale behind votes and discussions to the Arbitrum community.

• Accountability: delegates should maintain knowledge of funded initiatives and hold managing parties or elected representatives accountable.

• Responsiveness: delegates should use their best efforts to connect with the Arbitrum community and be accessible to answer questions or concerns.

We could also mention that a good practice is participating in the discussions where the delegate believes they can add value. This way, the delegate is not obligated to participate in every discussion, and we lay the foundation for a more professional DAO, with delegates focusing on their area of expertise.

@Entropy

Delegate Incentive Program Removal

As stated in the Delegate Incentive Program proposal, the program administrator reserves the right to issue a suspension or permanent ban if a delegate does not meet the eligibility requirements, which includes upholding the Code of Conduct. In the event of a suspension or expulsion from the program, the affected delegate may request a Snapshot vote to ratify, change, or revoke the administrator’s decision. This serves as a one-time appeal, and the decision made by the DAO will be final. It is expected that any party involved in the dispute refrains from actively voting (they may vote abstain or not vote at all) in the Snapshot appeal. Failure to do so will render the appeal mute and the administrator’s decision will stand as final.

DAO-Elected Position Removal

Any DAO member can propose a Snapshot vote to remove a DAO-elected representative. The proposal should clearly state the reasons for removal and provide evidence supporting the claims. Unless otherwise justified by a proposal author, the standard removal process will be a simple majority of votes cast by delegates with at least 3% of all votable tokens having cast votes in favor of the removal or abstaining. This should be a last resort and many other steps, including asking the DAO member to resign, should be taken first.

As for the delegate appeal system in the DIP, should we add the 3% requirement? From our side, there wouldn’t be an issue if the DAO considers the modification valid in this proposal (since it wasn’t contemplated in the text of the DIP 1.5).

@Entropy

The DAO agrees to a holiday break, where no new votes will be created and/or voted on from December 20 - January 6 annually. This is to ensure delegates have a break and can return refreshed for the new year. During this time it is advised that no new proposals are posted to the forums, and only emergency proposals are put up to a vote.

Something here concerned us:

If we all assume it’s holiday time and most people plan their absence accordingly, the DAO’s ability to respond to potential governance attacks or emergency votes will be reduced compared to the rest of the year. This is why it’s important to leave a message urging delegates to act with due diligence so that they can respond to unexpected situations. We understand that there is also a Security Council, but it’s important not to rely solely on them, and it’s also reasonable to expect that the availability of the Council members may not be the same during the holiday season.