DAO Code Of Conduct Revamp Proposal Draft 1

bDIP - Change - DAO Code Of Conduct Revamp Draft 1

Scope - Major

Affected Levels - DAO Wide

Author - infinitehomie.eth

Editors - minahasnoidea


This is a proposal for a guideline for contributor interactions in BanklessDAO. Due to the global nature of our community, and in the light of recent events WIP - Findings from the data surrounding Season 6 December Coordinape - Google Docs it became apparent that there is a need for a more comprehensive and issue encompassing code of conduct that is in line with our mission, vision and values and which is adaptable enough to account for the diverse and changing nature of our community. .


During the winter holiday it was uncovered that one of our contributors was impersonating other members for personal financial gains.In the light of the investigation that followed, it was discovered that other members were using BanklessDAO devices to fund personal exchanges unrelated to the DAO.

Due to the lack of a proper code of conduct, there were no conclusions that could be drawn in regards to the type of consequences those members should face. The issue concerning the member impersonating other members is currently being looked into by a team that took the initiative and is conducting a DAO wide sentiment check on this situation.

Hopefully, this will set a precedent.

However, it was noted that our current code of conduct found in the Constitution BanklessDAO Constitution & Handbook - Google Docs does not account for proven malicious actions against our community and does not provide any clear repercussions for bad faith actors. For clarity; I have copied the current code of conduct found in the bankless DAO constitution below:

Code of Conduct (EDIT: current bankless dao code of conduct found in the constitution)

Every member of the BanklessDAO community is expected and is responsible to treat others with respect and dignity. We are a globally distributed community representing numerous cultures, languages, and time zones. It’s our highest priority to be the most welcoming and inviting onboarding experience for Web3. To this end, we encourage any conflict to first be broached between involved persons. If this does not resolve the matter we encourage team champions or guild coordinators to help resolve the conflict. If this still doesn’t resolve the matter, parties are encouraged to approach the Ombuds office to help resolve the dispute. Our unity and internal cohesion are essential prerequisites to accomplishing our mission.

EDIT: The Above Code of Conduct , while being a fantastic start to building a code of conduct for the DAO, leaves more questions about bad actors, than answers.

This is especially concerning, given our main mission of onboarding safely and securely a billion people in Web3.

We want to Propose a process to expand the code of conduct to deal with bad actors, while balancing the importance of remaining decentralized in the ecosystem.

We want to do so by adding information on to the Code of Conduct that Covers spaces where DAO contributors can interact with one another, a more succinct conduct guideline to abide by, and a decision making process should bad actors arise. Below are the additions that we can propose initially to the code of conduct.

Due to the nature of this space the validity of this code of conduct should extend but not be limited to the following digital spaces:

  • Discord
  • Notion
  • Dework
  • Figma
  • Miro

In exceptional cases in which real life interaction is facilitated between the members in the context of DAO related activities, the validity of the code of conduct should be maintained.

Mutual respect is encouraged between contributors. Due to the multicultural and diverse nature of the space we are building, misunderstandings, disagreements and conflicts are to be expected as occurring phenomena. However, there is a line to be drawn in regards to the following behaviours.

  • Threats and acts of violence towards another contributor
    • Violence definition can be found here - Violence - Google Search
    • Violence is defined by the World Health Organization in the WRVH as “the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment
  • Vulgar comments towards contributors pertaining to sex, or nudity
  • Discrimination based on one’s immutable characteristics (sex, race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, age, neurodiversity, or disability)

As a contributor, you are expected to, and responsible for treating others with respect.

Contributors are expected to behave in a manner that acts in good faith of other contributors. Instances of

  • Fraud
  • Theft,
  • Embezzlement
  • Impersonation
  • Abuse of DAO status or held role
  • Abuse of influence

are not aligned with the mission of BanklessDAO. These instances can potentially open the DAO to severe issues in the Web3 ecosystem.

In order to keep developing the idea of a comprehensive code of conduct, this proposal welcomes criticism and ideas from different levels of contributors in the DAO. BanklessDAO strives to be a community that can comfortably incubate ideas of all kinds to better promote the mission of the DAO. We welcome all ideas for evaluation and deeper understanding.

Disagreements stemming from such ideas can happen. Disagreements should be focused on the issue at hand , rather than the person addressing it. .

Should conflict arise, members are encouraged to first attempt to resolve the conflict in a respectful manner. Should the conflict not be resolved at this point, we encourage contributors to reach out to the governance related role holders.These members could be Project Champions, Guild Coordinators, or Governance Coordinators. Should further resolution be needed, contributors can reach out to the Ombuds Office to mediate in the matter.


Should a member admit to fraud, embezzlement, theft, or wrongdoing of a legal nature, a member from Ombuds should the matter with the suspected party. Should there either be evidence of serious wrongdoing, or an admission of wrongdoing, the member will be subject to possible removal from the DAO, all statuses removed, and the wallet address red flagged, depending exactly on the nature of the offense. This final decision will be left to the DAO, Legal Guild, Ops Deparment, or Governance Deparment.


This DAO Code of Conduct will potentially move forward to influence the entire DAO. It is important that we all have a say in how this is created and how we should go forward.


  • obtain input from DAO for Draft 2
  • obtain consensus on who will make decisions on code of conduct violations
  • create oversight for code or conduct, or work with ombuds to create oversight for code of conduct.

Should we Enact this Change in the DAO Code of Conduct?

  • Yes
  • No
  • I have a suggestion I will add in the comments

0 voters

Appreciate the work here @homie.

In terms of the vote, I’m not sure what changes you are proposing, or if this is a bdip.

This reads like like this is more a proposal to garner feedback and sentiment for a future draft, to generate a bdip.

That true?

If so, could you clarify what you think should be added to the code of conduct?

I have a hard time voting to enact a change when I’m not sure what is being changed.

1 Like

thanks for the insight. still getting the hang of the process.

Above, I’ve quoted the current code of conduct. Goal is to change the above quote by adding more depth to the code of conduct . What’s I’ve written above, is a start. One can hope that it can be a start to the conversation surrounding how a code of conduct can be created, and how it can that conversation can result in working code of conduct for the DAO.

1 person cannot create a code of conduct for hundreds of others. But one person can at least open the door to make changes.

TLDR, this is a proposal to garner support to change the code of conduct from what is currently in the constitution to a more robust version that can be agreed upon in the DAO.

I think a word or 2 (typo) has occurred in the 1st line or sentence of the off boarding. At this point I do not understand what the ombudsman are doing. Is the word “discuss or investigate or inquire” missing or some other word or concept? Basically, I am supportive and this IMHO does expand and improve the handbook. Looking forward to additional drafts and improvement suggestions as well as reading the 26 page document that the ombudsmen team is preparing. TY Homie a fine start.

Thanks for this. I’m. Hoping that people will help me catch my errors so I can add into draft 2

The word I’m looking for is investigate with respect
To ombudsman.

As well. I think that this will effectively change when the ombuds report comes.