The Arbitrum DAO Delegate Code of Conduct

Announcements
1

The Arbitrum Delegate Code of Conduct is a set of guiding principles to help establish explicit expectations and responsibilities for delegates, while also ensuring that Arbitrum DAO’s culture is transparent, professional, and civil.

The Delegate Code of Conduct applies for interactions between delegates, whether online or offline. This includes the governance forum, Telegram and Discord chats, governance community or working group calls, and any other virtual or physical space that is de-facto understood to be a gathering place for the Arbitrum DAO. Delegates should use their best discretion and act in a way that aligns with the Code’s spirit, rather than seeking to exploit loopholes or ambiguities.

Following discussion and ratification by a Snapshot vote, the Delegate Code of Conduct is in effect until May 30th, 2025.

Important Terms

Delegate: An individual or entity who willingly engages in Arbitrum governance and has set up a Tally profile to receive delegations.

Community Guidelines: The rules of engagement for the Arbitrum DAO forum as outlined and enforced by the Arbitrum Foundation.

Conflict of Interest (COI): A situation where a delegate, or any entities that a delegate has a direct professional or financial relationship with, stands to directly benefit from the outcome of a proposal or election.

Responsible Voting: The practice of an election candidate casting votes for oneself and other candidates in a neutral manner to fill all open positions.

Shielded Voting: On Snapshot, delegates’ votes are kept private during the voting process, but made public after the conclusion of the vote.

Weighted Voting: Each delegate can spread their voting power across any number of choices, from one to all. Their voting power will be divided between their chosen options according to how much weight they attribute to each option by increasing or decreasing the voting power fraction.

Approval Voting: Each delegate can select (approve) any number of choices, and each selected choice will receive the delegate’s total voting power.

Arbitrum DAO Delegate Code of Conduct

Values Alignment

Arbitrum Delegates should always strive to uphold the seven community values stated in the Arbitrum Constitution:

  • Ethereum-aligned: Arbitrum is part of the Ethereum ecosystem and community
  • Sustainable: Focus on long-term health of the protocol over short-term gains
  • Secure: Arbitrum is security minded
  • Socially inclusive: Open and welcoming to all constructive participants
  • Technically inclusive: Accessible for ordinary people with ordinary technology
  • User-focused: Managed for the benefit of all users
  • Neutral and open: Foster open innovation, interoperation, user choice, and healthy competition

Good Faith and Best Interest

  • Delegates should conduct themselves with honesty, integrity, and transparency, fostering trust and confidence among community members.
  • Delegates should act and vote in accordance with what they see is in the best interests of Arbitrum, which encompasses but is not limited to all of the following: Arbitrum One, Arbitrum Nova, the Orbit Ecosystem, the ARB token, and any future Arbitrum DAO-governed chains as outlined in the Arbitrum Constitution.

Due Care and Attention

  • Delegates should remain knowledgeable of developments in regards to Arbitrum DAO’s initiatives and the broader Arbitrum ecosystem. Delegates can stay up to date with the following resources:
  • Delegates should make a professional and unbiased review of each proposal before submitting their vote.
  • Delegates are advised to vote abstain when unable to conduct the necessary diligence to understand the proposals.

Civility and Professionalism

  • While separate from the Code of Conduct, delegates are expected to uphold the community guidelines for activity on the Arbitrum DAO forum and de-facto understood gathering places for the Arbitrum DAO, whether online or in-person.
  • Delegates should seek to create a respectful and inclusive environment for all community members, free from harassment and discrimination.
    • Unacceptable behavior includes:
      • Publicly or privately harassing or intimidating others
      • Sharing someone’s private information without their consent
      • Using sexualized language or imagery, or making unwanted advances
      • Making insulting or derogatory comments about others
  • Delegates should strive to provide constructive feedback that is well-researched and respectful, focusing on the proposal’s merits. Personal attacks are never acceptable.
  • Delegates should be open-minded and respectful of differing viewpoints, even if they disagree with them. Disagreements are an inevitable part of healthy debate, but they often yield positive results when approached in a civil manner.
  • Delegates should make a best effort to provide constructive feedback through appropriate channels and avoid taking discussions to social media in a manner that could tarnish Arbitrum DAO’s brand and reputation.

Responsibility

  • Maintaining a culture of productive debate, integrity, and transparency requires a sense of collective responsibility. As entrusted leaders of the Arbitrum community, delegates should take responsibility in fostering and maintaining a culture that promotes the principles outlined herein.
  • 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.

Conflicts of Interest

Disclosure and Transparency Policy: If a conflict of interest exists, it is expected the delegate discloses the nature and extent of the conflict in writing on the forum before voting. Proposal authors should disclose potential conflicts in the COI section of the recommended proposal template as outlined in the “How to Submit a DAO Proposal” by the Arbitrum Foundation. While it may not always be clear if an individual stands to gain “directly” or “indirectly”, delegates and proposal authors are recommended to lean on the side of over-communication in the name of transparency.

Delegates that disclose a conflict of interest are not expected to alter their voting in any way. Self-voting is not currently banned outright for the reasons stated in previous DAO-wide discussions and based on sentiment gathered from a subsequent temperature check. However, a delegate that repeatedly fails to disclose a conflict of interest before self-voting or fails to adhere to the Responsible Voting Policy when participating in an election, risks being removed from the Delegate Incentive Program or a DAO-elected position.

Enforcement

Delegates participating in the Delegate Incentive Program (DIP) and representatives appointed through an official election or ratification process through Snapshot or Tally who receive compensation as part of their position, are required to publicly agree to abide by the Code of Conduct. Violations of the Code of Conduct may result in removal from the Delegate Incentive Program or a DAO-elected position. If the Arbitrum Foundation recommends that a delegate should be removed from DIP, the administrator will serve as a check and balance on that decision; the removal process is detailed further directly below.

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. Quorum for an appeal vote is at least 3% of all votable tokens having cast votes in favor of supporting the appeal or abstaining. 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 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. Additionally, an elected-representative removal Snapshot must adhere to the agreed upon voting schedule and minimum discussion period of seven days. This should be a last resort and many other steps, including asking the DAO member to resign, should be taken first.

Conflict Resolution

Resolution of conflicts between delegates will be entrusted to the Arbitrum Foundation, who will act as a neutral mediator. It is recommended that delegates first seek to resolve conflict issues in good faith and privately. If the matter is unable to be resolved for any reason, or if the behavior is threatening or harassing, report it to the Arbitrum Foundation using this form. The Arbitrum Foundation will have final say on the issue and reserves the right to determine if the issue should be brought to the attention of the community as a whole.

Attribution

MakerDAO
Go
1inch DAO
ENS DAO
Uniswap DAO
Aave DAO
dYdX DAO
Optimism DAO

2 Likes