Code of Conduct

Code of Conduct

Last updated 2/9/24, following the approval of Proposal to Reclassify Grant Misusage Enforcement

Scope: This Code of Conduct applies to all delegates, Citizens, and grant recipients (“Optimists”). This Code of Conduct applies within all community spaces and when an individual is representing the community in public, either online or offline

The Rules of Engagement apply to anyone using the Forum (Discourse), Discord, and Reddit. Severe Violations (such as discrimination, harassment, doxxing, etc.) result in an immediate one month suspension and are now enforced via the Rules of Engagement

Optimist behavior should be aligned with Optimist Expectations

Optimists should actively discourage others from breaking community standards. Optimists should report serious or repeat offenses, as outlined in the relevant documentation. Violations that are reported using any other process will not be addressed

Policies in the Code of Conduct go into effect at the time they are included in the Code of Conduct and do not apply retroactively

The Code of Conduct will not cover all possible scenarios and edge cases. We ask that Optimists please act in accordance with the spirit of the Code of Conduct and refrain from exploiting loopholes that may exist


Severe Violations (such as discrimination, harassment, doxxing, etc.) result in an immediate one month suspension and are now enforced via the Rules of Engagement


Inclusivity, Extreme Civility, Good Faith and Best Interest, and Due Care and Attention are all Optimist Expectations.

These expectations should be reflected in delegation (or via undelegating for failure to uphold them) and may be considered in future Citizenship criteria.


Accountability

  • Collective Council and Advisory Board Members must uphold the responsibilities outlined in the corresponding Charters. Failure of Council members to uphold their responsibilities is grounds for Collective Council or Advisory Board Member Removal, as outlined in the Operating Manual
  • Mandatory (Violation 1): All grant recipients must abide by the Collective Grant Policies, outlined here. These policies have been updated to include clauses that were previously outlined in the Code of Conduct, for simplicity.

No Self-Dealing

  • Mandatory (Violation 2): Optimists must avoid conflicts of interest where possible and mitigate their impact when not possible. We recommend over-communicating and disclosing potential conflicts of interest even when they do not warrant abstaining from a vote.

    • 2a. Any actual or reasonably anticipated conflicts of interest must be disclosed in writing and prominently displayed ahead of any voting (i.e. when submitting delegate commitments, when approving proposal drafts, when running for an elected position, when making public recommendations, etc.).
    • 2b. Any offer for external compensation relating to delegation or external compensation relating to the Optimism Protocol must be promptly disclosed.
    • 2c. Delegates are prohibited from approving and voting on their own proposals (this includes approval voting for Missions in which you are a team member or advisor). Delegates may not vote solely for their own candidacy in an election. In the case of approval/ranked choice elections, delegates may vote for themselves, so long as they also cast votes for the remaining elected positions.
      • Example: I can vote for my own candidacy on the Growth Experiments committee, so long as I also cast 4 additional votes (a total of 5 votes, as there are 5 open positions on the sub-committee.)
    • d. Badgeholders must not vote for organizations where they expect any portion of funds to flow to them or any projects from which they derive income.
  • Mandatory (Violation 3): Badgeholders must not use private voting to obscure self-dealing.

    • After RetroPGF Rounds end, the Foundation or a future Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council may randomly sample ballots to check for conflicts of interest.
    • If a suspected self-dealing violation is filed, the Foundation or a future Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council may also review the ballot of the reported badgeholder to check for conflicts of interest.
    • Any Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council members that violate the privacy of randomly sampled or selectively revealed ballots would be violating their responsibilities as Council members and would be subject to Collective Council and Advisory Board Member Removal, as outlined in the Operating Manual

Reporting

All Optimists are expected to abide by this Code of Conduct. Any Optimist that is found to be in breach of this Code of Conduct will be subject to the below enforcement procedures.

  • Type of violation:

    • Standard:

      • To report a Code of Conduct violation in the Token House, use this reporting form.
      • To report a Code of Conduct violation in the Citizens’ House, use this reporting form.
    • Grant misusage:

      • To report a violation of the grant policies or failure to meet a critical milestone, use this reporting form.
    • For both types of violations, please cite the specific violation number (and letter, if applicable).

  • The Code of Conduct Council will review all Token House submissions. The identity of a submission author will not be publicly disclosed by the Code of Conduct Council without the author’s consent.

  • Submission authors and/or the individual(s) or project(s) in question may be contacted by the Code of Conduct Council for additional information, if necessary.

  • Please note: The Foundation will process Code of Conduct reports for the Citizens’ House before a Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council is elected.

Enforcement

There are a variety of possible enforcement actions, depending on the severity and type of the offense. The Token House will vote on the removal of Collective Council and Advisory Board Members, as outlined in the Operating Manual. The Token House Code of Conduct Council will process all other Token House violations, according to their Council Charter. The Foundation will process Code of Conduct violations for the Citizens’ House before a Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council is elected.
Please note that ultimately Citizenship Criteria will be set via governance, at which point Citizens’ House Code of Conduct enforcement will be encoded in that criteria.

Enforcement Type Type of Violation Enforcement Consequence
Standard Violations
Warning First instance of inappropriate behavior. In Season 5, the NERDs, Token House Code of Conduct Council, or Foundation may process and issue reported warnings. A private, written warning, providing clarity around the nature of the violation and an explanation of why the behavior was inappropriate. A public apology may also be requested.
Temporary Suspension A serious violation of the above standards or repeated warnings. In Season 5, the Token House Code of Conduct Council will process and issue temporary Token House suspensions, subject to governance veto*. The Foundation will process and issue temporary suspensions in the Citizens’ House. In the Token House this equates to a temporary ban, lasting the length of 1 month, from Discord, Discourse, and Reddit. In the Citizens’ House, this equates to the removal of a voting badge for the remainder of the current or next nearest Round. The suspension will not apply to subsequent Rounds. No related public or private interaction with the community members involved is allowed, including unsolicited interaction with those enforcing the Code of Conduct. Violating these terms may lead to longer term suspension.
Suspension Repeated violation of the above standards, including sustained inappropriate behavior. In Season 5, the Token House Code of Conduct Council will process and issue Token House suspensions, subject to governance veto*. The Foundation will process and issue suspensions in the Citizens’ House. In the Token House, this equates to delegate suspension from Discord and Discourse and any sort of interaction within the community for a period of three months. OP Chains receiving delegation via the Chain Delegation Program will lose the corresponding delegation for the remainder of the program. In the Citizens’ House, this equates to permanent loss of badge (please note that this badgeholder may re-qualify to be a Citizen in the future based on Citizenship Criteria.) Optimists may still participate in a RetroPGF round based on contributions made before the violation.

Grant Misusage

A locked grant may be clawed back before distribution for failure to execute on critical milestones, as defined by proposers and documented publicly. The Token House Code of Conduct Council will process and issue grant clawbacks, subject to Token House veto*.

All other grant misusage should be reported through the Grant Misusage Process.


*Token House Code of Conduct Council decisions are optimistically approved by the Council’s corresponding House.That means the Council’s decisions will be assumed to have passed unless the Token House explicitly vetoes them. If >12% of the votable supply vetoes a Token House enforcement action, enforcement will go to a Token House vote in the next nearest Voting Cycle.

Change Process

The Code of Conduct, the Rules of Engagement, and any other associated documents, must only be updated during Reflection Periods or following extraordinary circumstances that require immediate updates. In all cases, a change log will be published for delegates.

Attribution

42 Likes

Can delgates abstain on their own proposals to maintain voting record. Currently indicated by a % in the agora UI?

4 Likes

op is best i all time use from all apps

2 Likes

Perfect explanation OP

3 Likes

Reiteration and reminders at a time frame is must.

1 Like

Updated Violation 6 to specify it pertains to violations of both grant policies outlined here, not just the no-sale policy

2 Likes

Very thorough! :ok_hand: great documentation.

2 Likes

Updated on 9/29/23 during the Reflection Period proceeding Season 5:

  • Violation 2: updated to clarify that whistleblowing is not a violation
  • Violation 5: expanded to account for new governance structures and to clarify Violation 5 is a severe violation
  • Violation 8: added “or request an extension approved by the Grants Council.”
  • Violation 9: added “Builders grants may be self-delegated during and/or after the one-year lock-up period. Delegations may be made or changed at the time a grant is received or at the start of a Season.”
  • Minor clarifications were made under Violation 10 (10a, 10c, and 10d) and 10f was added
  • References to the Protocol Delegation Program, which has concluded, have been removed
  • Violation 11 was added
  • A reporting process for Citizens’ House violations was added
  • Updates were made to reflect the Code of Conduct Council(s) will replace the Foundation in processing violation reports
  • Updates were made to enforcement actions to include the role of the NERDs and the Code of Conduct Councils
7 Likes

Minor update was made to clarify the language around badgeholder conflicts of interest, in alignment with the badgeholder manual

1 Like

In accordance with the outlined change process, the Code of Conduct was updated on 12/13/23 during the Reflection Period proceeding Season 5:

  • All “should” statements have been moved into Optimist Expectations. These expectations should be reflected in delegation (or via undelegating for failure to uphold them) and may be considered in future Citizenship criteria. These expectations are important guidelines but they are not well-suited to enforcement via the Code of Conduct given inherent subjectivity.

  • Severe Violations were moved into the Rules of Engagement; you can reference the full change log to the Rules of Engagement here. This has been done to eliminate ambiguity about which process severe violations should go through. The consequences of committing a severe violation remain the same: suspension from Optimism community spaces.

  • Information about Collective Council and Advisory Board Member Removal has been added to the “Accountability” section

  • All other clauses previously outlined in the “Accountability section” are now outlined in the Collective Grant Policies for simplicity. One clause from the “No Self-Dealing” section, previously identified as 10e (pertaining to disclosures), has also been moved to Grant Policies.

  • The Enforcement section has been modified slightly to reflect the above changes and to more accurately reflect the role of the Token House Code of Conduct Council.

5 Likes

This looks very clear on the borderline of what should/should not be done for the community.
Noted!

2 Likes

In accordance with the Code of Conduct’s Change Process, outlining an update made on 2/9/24, in conjunction with the passing of Proposal to Reclassify Grant Misusage Enforcement and feedback regarding understandability of Code of Conduct enforcement in the Citizens’ House.

Change log:

  • Clarified the definition of ‘severe violation’ and corresponding enforcement action
  • Changed “should” to “must” in Violation 2d
  • Clarified the Code of Conduct Council is the Token House Code of Conduct Council, where applicable; clarified a Citizens’ House Code of Conduct Council does not currently exist, where applicable
  • Clarified the definition of a temporary suspension as: “A serious violation of the above standards or repeated warnings.”
  • Updated the Grant Misusage section to reflect the approved proposal (removal of future grant freeze, inclusion of grant clawback, and specification that the grant misusage reporting form should also be used to report failure to complete critical milestones.)
  • Clarified that Citizens’ House temporary suspensions do not apply over multiple Rounds
  • Added link to Chain Delegation Program
2 Likes