Guidance on Severe Violations of the Rules of Engagement


When talking about harassment it is important to understand who and what can be harassed. We believe that everyone deserves to be treated with respect and kindness. This means treating people with kindness regardless of what you think they have done (i.e., even if you think they are scamming others). No one deserves to be harassed.

Harassment is about how you treat them and has nothing to do with what they are doing.


Before we get into they types of harassment, let’s make the distinction between making a valid critique of an individual or project’s actions and harassment.


    :white_check_mark: Laying out the facts with clear supporting evidence in an appropriate place, without including your personal opinion with the evidence.

    e.g.: Project XYZ transferred their funds on xx day, as you can see in this transaction 0x…. This action clearly violated the no sale rule outlined in the Operating Manual. I have started a thread in the Monitoring governance form, if anyone else has evidence please add it.

    :warning: Posting evidence on Twitter/Discord does not help in reporting destructive behavior. Arguing with people is not the correct way to report misconduct.

    This form of engagement often ends up as harassment. Please use the correct method for reporting, as laid out in the Rules of Engagement.

    :no_entry_sign: In a highly public forum (like Discord) making unsubstantiated claims using inflammatory, hostile, rude or otherwise emotional language, encouraging or outright calling others to take action individually rather than following the appropriate process.

    e.g.: Project XYZ is a scam and will steal all your money! The founders are all scammers and should never be allowed to make another project! Everyone should report them!


There are multiple ways you can cyber bully individuals and projects. They are all harmful and violate the Rules of Engagement.


Public harassment is attempting to make an individual or project look bad in a public space, such as Twitter or Discord. This kind of harassment often uses inflammatory and emotional language and may escalate to encouraging others to harass the individual as well (see 1.3).

It may take the form of multiple Tweet threads or messages directly attacking the individual or project.




To report public harassment, you would have to provide evidence such as screenshots of multiple instances of this type of behavior in a public platform.


Private harassment looks like intimidation. This could take the form of directly messaging an individual and threatening to report them, doxx or otherwise cause them distress. Private harassment is a repeated behavior (one message warning that you will be reported does not qualify).

Private harassment is often done as a means to an end, for example threatening to release information if an individual does not perform a certain action (such as voting a specific way or sending funds). Private harassment does not need to have ulterior motives to qualify. Private harassment does require multiple offenses to qualify.

To report private harassment, you would have to provide evidence such as screenshots of multiple direct messages.


Encouraging others to attack, harass or otherwise disrupt an individual or project also constitutes harassment.

This may look like encouraging others to report a project or person on a platform (like Twitter, Discord, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). This is especially harmful during investigations as it may obscure evidence or escalate to doxxing.

To report encouragement of harassment, you would have to provide evidence such as multiple screenshots of posts (on any platform) that encourage, suggest or otherwise imply that others should join in the harassment.


Privacy is a fundamental human right that the Collective takes seriously. Doxxing is searching for and posting or otherwise making publicly available any private or personally identifying information, in a public forum, where the information was not already available.

The information does not have to be correct for it to constitute doxxing.


Doxxing includes sharing information that identifies a person, such as their real name, place of work, links to other profiles of theirs that have additional personal information (such as a LinkedIn profile), and the like.


    Sally has her name as her handle in Discord (@Sally45), as well as having her PFP set to a photo of her. She is not anonymous, but she can still be doxxed.

    Sally and Fred get into an argument about a proposal that Sally posted. Fred is very upset, and finds Sally’s LinkedIn profile and obtains her last name. He then posts her full name in Discord, telling others she is a scammer.

    This is considered doxxing as Fred researched Sally with the intent of exposing her. He researched additional personal identifying information and then cross posted this information that was not available on Discord.

    Fred has doxxed Sally, and as such violated the Rules of Engagement.

To report this type of doxxing, you would have to provide evidence such as a screenshot of the offender posting personally identifying information in a public forum.


Doxxing includes searching for information about an individual that links their anon profile to their identity.

This can look like posting a photo of an anon person (say, from a conference) and tagging their anon handle, thus linking their face to their handle. ALWAYS ask permission before posting photos that have other people in them.

To report this type of doxxing, you would have to provide evidence such as a screenshot of the offender posting a photo or personally identifying information in a public forum.


Doxxing also includes publicly disclosing someone’s physical location. This can look like posting hotel rooms, home addresses, or place of work address (office address).

To qualify as a physical location doxxing for purposes of violating the Rules of Engagement, the location information needs to be specific enough for someone to reasonably find the person based off this information. Note that even if disclosing physical location does not amount to a Rules of Engagement violation, it is still strongly discouraged.


    :white_check_mark: Sally lives in America.

    This is not doxxing as this information is too broad to find Sally. However, this kind of sharing is still strongly discouraged.

    :warning: Sally is attending ETHConference.

    This is not specific enough to cause Sally physical danger, or to be used to find her. However, this is strongly discouraged and may result in a warning. If the offending post includes a call to action (such as “if you see her ask her why she scammed people!!”) or is otherwise tied to harassment, then it would constitute a violation under harassment.

    :no_entry_sign: Sally is staying in Average Hotel!

    This puts Sally in danger, and is considered a physical location doxx.

    :no_entry_sign: Sally lives on 123 Imagine Road, City.

    This puts Sally in danger, and is considered a physical location doxx.

To report this type of doxxing, you would have to provide evidence such as a screenshot of the offender posting your physical location in a public forum.

Update Process

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.


This is a very helpful post.
And the ‘0. Scope’ is an interesting viewpoint, but critically important; in particular for all of us to remember when we see something we feel is off.
A clear understanding of these violations is a great preemptive way to avoid violations and encourage good behaviour.
Well done!

1 Like

Good Start and progressive thinking.

Updated to reflect severe violations are now processed via the Rules of Engagement, rather than the Code of Conduct.

1 Like