https://gov.optimism.io/t/code-of-conduct-councils/6888/12?u=kaereste
there have now been two code of conduct violation votes before token house. on both, gfx labs chose to abstain because details needed to make an informed decision could not be made public. establishing a body whose responsibility it is to evaluate allegations and censure offenders removes wider governance from weighing in on alleged violations without proper review process that is fair to both parties.
the establishment of the token house code of conduct council is a pivotal step towards ensuring adherence to set behavior standards within the collective.
good experiment.
it is a more decentralized method that separates the processing violations of the code of conduct removes enforcement responsibility from token house delegates and establishes a coc council.
i am also happy to see a council formed to relive the foundation of this controversial distraction.
voting for the proposal.
we support this proposal as it addresses the shortcomings of previous code of conduct violation votes, where evidence was not disclosed publicly, making it challenging to arrive at informed decisions. by transitioning the enforcement of code of conduct violations to a dedicated council, this proposal not only facilitates a more structured and impartial review process but also alleviates the burden on wider governance. moreover, the election of council members ensures accountability and community engagement, promoting a more transparent and fair governance structure.
this approach is more decentralized, taking the task of handling breaches of the code of conduct away from the token house representatives and creating a council specifically for the code of conduct. by forming a group dedicated to assessing accusations and penalizing those at fault, it ensures that broader governance does not make judgments on supposed infractions without a thorough and equitable examination process that considers the rights and perspectives of all involved parties.