BDIP-2: Article VI - Conduct and Expectations of the Proposal Jury

Article VI - Conduct and Expectations of the Proposal Jury

Section 1. Proposal Jury members should uphold their professional standards according to Article 6: Community Standards and Ethics of the DAOstitution.

  1. Objectivity is expected from members of the Proposal Jury
  2. Conflicts of Interest are to be addressed and brought to the DAO Court
  3. Accurate feedback and criticism is to be provided to each Proposal.
  4. Proposal Jury members are to ensure that correct formats are followed and that English is kept to the standard of communication for Proposals.
  5. They are expected to check proposals for issues of potential plagiarism.
  6. If the proposal is deemed to be violative of any provision, rule, or guideline of the DAOstitution, the Proposal Jury shall vote to reject the said proposal without fail.
  7. Proposal Jury members are expected to act as one unit without deviation in terms of the following guidelines. If this is not able, this is to be flagged internally.
1 Like

I just wonder if the proposal jury will also have the power to issue merits for commendable proposals and demerits for violative ones.

And this kind of system may have equivalent rewards/violation such as free airdrop or account suspension, maybe?

With this, we promote the responsible posting and healthy interaction within the DAO community. :+1:

This is harsh but anyway in any action, good or bad, there are always consequences.

1 Like

I understand what you mean but, I think it’s just fair to make it possible to implement and realize that we have to follow certain rules along with observing proper ethics. :+1:

1 Like

I won’t argue with you about that, pal! Like what I said, there are always consequences for every action taken. But what must be done is proper punishment or penalty for those who violate the rules. And what you stated above is not that bad as a suggestion as I can see, and I think must be given thought by the team as well. :+1:

1 Like

Exactly! We’re on the same page, pal! I hope the team will consider. :ok_hand:

Strict rules but that is to be expected. But it doesn’t specially state what will happen if one of the members commit an error.

I believe it is only fair to enable us to know that we must adhere to certain standards in addition to upholding decent ethics.

I second how we should always have accurate feedback and criticism to be provided on each proposal, this way we can further improve and assess each proposal to the fullest.

1 Like

We need this to have order anyways. xD

1 Like

Adding up to your statement, the voting system will be that final judge of the proposal if it is good to implement or not. :+1:

Having reviewed this article, isn’t it more engaging if the proposal jury is also an active community members? Where, we can also see their presence by commenting, not necessarily on all, but on some of the discussions here?

This comment got me thinking. This would be a nice idea.

1 Like

I concur with this. Those who disregard the rules must get punishment or some other form of retribution. It is just to be fair to everyone here in the community.

That’s right, In a way everyone will have to be careful with they do. I mean I love a community with proper ethics.


I agree, I’m glad they have this for everyone to follow.

Indeed! A community that respects each other and thinks before they click is what makes a healthy community.

1 Like

I also think it would be helpful if jury members will have a badge on their nametag for easy distinction. :+1:

Very well said. Healthy community is the best community.

I couldn’t agree more! And it is a lot easier to welcome more people to join us and trust the project at the same time.

1 Like