Should the DAO Create COI & Self Voting Policies?

[SEEDGov]

After consideration, the @SEEDgov delegation has decided to vote “FOR: Responsible Voting Policy and FOR: Disclosure Policy” on this proposal at the Snapshot vote.

Rationale

Thanks @Entropy for bringing this topic back into the discussion.

@Entropy

Disclosure and Transparency Policy: If a potential COI exists, it is expected that proposal authors or delegates disclose the nature and extent of the interest. While it may not always be clear if an individual stands to gain “directly” or “indirectly”, it is recommended to lean on the side of over-communication in the name of transparency. Delegates are not expected to abstain or alter their voting preferences in any way, but are free to choose to abstain.

In addition to the examples mentioned above, we also want to emphasize the importance of ensuring the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest (COIs) by members of Councils, Committees, and other gov positions. For instance, if I am a member of the LTIPP Council and have potential COIs with certain protocols, it is expected that I should disclose such situations before any vote is taken.

@Entropy

Currently, our team is leaning towards making the future delegate code of conduct opt-in, following in Uniswap DAO’s footsteps by creating a document that serves simply as a form of guidance. We envision soft-enforcement can be applied through the Delegate Incentive Program by requiring participating delegates to abide by the ratified code of conduct in order to be eligible for rewards. Further UI changes on Tally could also be applied to help token holders discover which delegates have publicly committed to following the agreed upon code of conduct.

Sounds interesting. If a code of conduct is approved, it would make sense for the program to only accept delegates who agree to abide by what the DAO has voted on. This could be seen as a non-negotiable condition for participating in the DIP. In the event of a potential violation, the DAO could decide via Snapshot vote whether a delegate has breached the code of conduct and, consequently, whether they should lose the right—either temporarily or permanently—to participate in the DIP.

That being said, we welcome the idea of establishing a code of conduct that includes guidelines on disclosing conflicts of interest (COI) and implementing a responsible voting policy. As mentioned earlier, disclosing COIs is ethically sound from our perspective. While we already observe responsible voting practices in action, formalizing it in a future code of conduct could add clarity and consistency.

However, we have reservations about adopting a strict self-voting policy, as it could restrict both the delegate’s and their delegators’ freedom to vote in the best interest of the DAO.