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.
Objectivity is expected from members of the Proposal Jury
Conflicts of Interest are to be addressed and brought to the DAO Court
Accurate feedback and criticism is to be provided to each Proposal.
Proposal Jury members are to ensure that correct formats are followed and that English is kept to the standard of communication for Proposals.
They are expected to check proposals for issues of potential plagiarism.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.