Still not taking responsibility for your actions; and still going with the victim narrative.
Do you think this is a fun discussion for anyone in the DAO to have?
Did this come out of nowhere?
You literally attacked governance, slandered contributors using fake accounts and spread lies about multisig being hacked (are you aware what situation that puts the multisigners in?), tried to lie about it, then when it wasnât possible anymore, you blamed it on the community, and took quotes from the BanklessDAOâs governing docs and twisted them to serve your purpose.
So many people in the DAO has some issues with you before this. Itâs repetitive and continuous.
Joe ainât questioning your mental stability ffs, he is literally stating your actions and everyone who can read can see those are the facts. Whether you have mental issues or not, well heck everyone has some, is not whatâs been discussed here. Itâs your actions!!!
Where do they come from - from you not really getting it, or being malicious, or bc you do have some mental issues - we do not care!
Your L2 tag was temporarily suspended as a security measure, which I believe any organization of any sort would have done in this situation. It could easily be restored later if that is the will of the DAO. When this situation came to my attention temporarily pulling the L2 tag was my very first thought. For several weeks now I have started every morning by opening the Discord Audit Log and filtering by your username to see what damage youâve done.
As an addendum to my previous post:
Work done must be compensated, and as part of the freezing of BANK payments, the value should be converted to stablecoins and paid out in that form to settle the debt.
An offer at market rate for BANK she holds to be bought back, also in USDC/ETH. We cannot nor should we force her to sell, but I believe we should proactively give an offramp to that Bank. She can choose to decline at her prerogative.
Based on the above discussion Iâve Identified these options:
Timeout in the DAO
Temporary ban from the DAO (with a timeout)
Permanent Ban from the DAO (without timeout)
Do Nothing
If there are any others, please respond.
I will leave this on the forum for 1 day, then create a gated poll to L1 to be voted on for 7 days in the DAO.
Open to debate whether it should be L1 or L2 only.
Thoughts?
1. Timeout in the DAO
Temporary Restrictions, but she can stay at the DAO.
This includes:
Removal of L2
L1 Is maintained as long as she qualifies.
Removal from Notion admin privileges.
Ineligible for DAO elected Roles and multisig involvement.
This will be rescinded AFTER the timeout period is done.
Suggested 1 Seasons (4 months).
2. Temporary Ban
This is essentially a more serious timeout, that would be rescinded after the ban timeout expires.
This includes:
Temporarily banning her account and wallet from discord, with a timeout.
Temporarily banning her account from Discourse with a timeout.
Removal from Notion admin privileges.
Suggested 1 Season (4 months)
3. Permanent Ban
This is permanent expulsion.
This includes:
Permanently banning her account and wallet from the the DAO.
Permanently banning her account from Discourse with a timeout.
Removal from Notion admin privileges.
4. Do nothing
Self explanatory.
High level, these are the only actions we can take as a DAO.
The others, are the prerogative of their individual units.
I donât disagree with the points raised or the possibilities for forward movement here.
I would however, like to point out that afaik the DAO still does not have an approved, consistent policy for:
offboarding (what to do with memberâs permissions)
what constitutes a violation that necessitates offboarding (where is the line?)
and a written enforcement mechanism for said policies
I have raised the issue in the past and it was an issue of social conduct that the #daoversity workstream that @RedCrystalDragon, @VallentinaC, @Humpty and I were active on in may 2022. These things above are necessary and have been missing from bDAO constitution as a Code of Conduct and have allowed negative behavior to continue and escalate unchecked until it becomes a crisis level issue when things could have been addressed before they reach that level if people know where the line is.
P.S. it appears red has been active in trying to revive the Code of conduct on the forums in the time since
During the cooridnape attack, when whales admitted that he stole from the DAO.
Design Guild Paid him out. This is no disrespect to @Reinis , and he put out a sensible point behind why he paid whales out. Even though whales did a major effort to hurt me, hurt the DAO, hurt coordinape (an external project) @Reinis was right in the decision he made in paying whales out.
However, if you discipline projects due to sprinkles, and you didnât discipline projects do to whales. Thatâs going to leave a mark. I encourage you to reconsider this aspect of your decisions.
Mainly because there are a lot of flaws in DAO governance. And this case really opened the can of worms. Whereas previously we have used our human discretion and âgood faithâ to mull over all the differences.
I second this. It is why I have stated that it seems like it an emotional reckoning and not one based on written policy. Personally, I feel bDAO has existed long enough to have established more robust processes for this and similar instances. Specially as this is not the first time we are dealing with this type of behavior. I introduced several forms of doing this in the past with Colony, Moloch DAO, and other decentralized tools in the past, but it fell to deaf ears. Iâd like to think that bDAO will now take its responsibility to its community more seriously and build better governance. But sadly, I expect nothing will come out of this too.
We are responsible for our own initiatives in a DAO. If you want something to happen, why not spearhead the issue? There are lots of people interested, Iâm sure you will find others who want to help.
I have. Please re-read, âI introduced several forms of doing this in the past with Colony, Moloch DAO, and other decentralized tools in the past, but it fell to deaf ears.â This was back around Season 3 of bDAO. I would happily collab on this again âBut sadly, I expect nothing will come out of this too.â
There is a culture change needed. And reading many of the comments on this forum and on Discord the past few days, I am not sure how open we would be to taking on such a change. Though without it, I see it very difficult to grow beyond where we find ourselves today.
What do you mean by introduced? Did you test them in a project or guild? Are there tests spaces that one can log into to see how it works? That would be awesome and engaging!
Again I say: people are interested in this now, so now is a great time to gain consensus. If you care about this then itâs an excellent time to get others to care as well. Why not start by sharing the lessons you learned while introducing these tools in S3?
It took me a bit to wrap my head around what went down. IMHO, Iâve got much respect for @Sprinklesforwinners as a top-notch contributor in bDAO. She has done great work with the Project Management Guild, Treasury Department, and Grant Committee. I bet many people whoâve worked with her feel the same way. My first thought was like, âNo way, not her!â 'Cause itâs clear sheâs all about this community based on her past actions. However, I strongly disagree with how she tried to show off our systemâs vulnerability. That being said, itâs crucial to remain objective when assessing this incident and determining appropriate consequences, considering both her previous contributions and the harm caused by this incident.
Rather than becoming sidetracked by minor disputes in the thread, I suggest we should get our community to focus on the big picture:
Which principles have been violated?
What was her intention, and was it positive or negative? It may also be necessary to consider her recent personal challenges with her family.
What consequences or damages resulted from this incident? What sort of restitution or punishment, both financial and non-financial, needs to happen?
How can we prevent similar incidents in the future?
Verify the frustrations expressed by @Sprinklesforwinners. If found to be accurate, what solutions should be implemented?
In the end, letâs all just chill a bit and handle this thing together. The long-term well-being of bDAO will benefit if we can collaborate with all members, including @Sprinklesforwinners , to resolve the situation.
Iâd love to something along these lines with specifics for bDAO.
Youâll notice a big difference in our content moderation approach compared to other major social media platforms.
Weâre not building another self-declared âneutralâ platform. We believe that far too often, âneutralityâ is used as an excuse to allow behaviors and content thatâs designed to harass and harm those from communities that have always faced harassment and violence. Our content moderation plan is rooted in the goals and values expressed in our Mozilla Manifesto â human dignity, inclusion, security, individual expression and collaboration. We understand that individual expression is often seen, particularly in the US, as an absolute right to free speech at any cost. Even if that cost is harm to others. We do not subscribe to this view.
We want to be clear about this. Weâre building an awesome sandbox for us all to play in, but it comes with rules governing how we engage with one another. Youâre completely free to go elsewhere if you donât like them.
If bDAO does not invest time and energy into specifying when protection from harm supersedes âfree expressionâ then by default âfree expressionâ rules, which I do not believe should be the highest value of any organization. The bDAO Code of Conduct was our attempt to codify where we believed the lines should be drawn. If no one has the willingness to work to define those then nothing will change.
As others have noted, this issue has arisen multiple times in the past (and will continue to do so!)
Lack of enthusiasm for a Bill of Rights for bDAO has meant that I have reduced my involvement as I do not align with the demonstrated beliefs of the DAO. I am not optimistic about it becoming reality either @Humpty.
Infosec has implemented the ban, we need to decide on for how long since it was a tie between forever or 1 year.
Follow up items:
The Governance Department is investigating sybil resistant tooling
If anyone is interested in helping out here, please do join. - Thursdays at 1pm EST
Infosec is investigating security measures around roles, especially L2.
Expect a write up on this soon.
There are talks about updating the code of conduct.
If anyone wants to be involved with this, please also join in the governance department discussions.
As a final note on this, I regret that this has happened and we have had to take a course of action around it. Although it is a good reminder that, we canât control what happens to the DAO, but we can control how we respond.
I think we have overall responded fairly well.
A lot of attention and discussion has developed around our governance and tooling, and this is the best result of this incident. Looking forward to the results from those discussions.