We wanted to open governance discussions by drafting together the values of the DAO.
These will be used to mediate contentious decisions if need be and crystallize the standard to which the core team and our contributors hold themselves to.
For the voting mechanism, we were thinking of creating a continuous vote over the next two months where users ratify one by one the first 5 articles.
Article I - Neutrality
*The Paladin Protocol, will not directly take part in governance proposals with the voting power deposited in its platform.
The Protocol will also refrain from participating in external governance when it does not directly concern itself or its direct participating interests.
Article II - Pseudonymity
All members of the DAO and protocol users must go to the best lengths as humanly possible to respect the anonymity / pseudonymity of members.
Members are free to disseminate information about themselves without limits. However, exposing a member’s personal information goes against the ethos of our DAO.
Article III - Transparency
Any party shall refrain from hiding conflicts of interest when presenting a proposal in or through the Paladin Protocol.
All inquiries should be discussed on the Paladin forum https://gov.paladin.vote/ for everyone to see and contribute.
All back-end code shall be public and all official discussions should be at least read only.
Article IV - Financing
The Paladin DAO will not allocate funds, whether through grants or any other mechanism, to any party that does not commit to uphold the same principles outlined in this Constitution in their use of the allocated funds.
Article V - Decentralization
In the spirit of decentralization, the Paladin Protocol core team will progressively, but steadily grant full control of the DAO to its community.
Discussions involving the protocol, DAO, or any relation thereof, will be discussed on Discord and Discourse, or any future communication platform in an open manner.
Article VI - Amendments to this constitution
Any change may be made to this constitution only by at least 20% of all tokens circulating.
Excellent list! Also, I appreciate the effort of setting constitutional principles upfront
Everything is defined inwards, which is good, but I’d love to see some provision regarding how Paladin DAO interacts with other DAOs and decentralized governance in general. There’s one mention in the Neutrality article, but, well, it’s neutral by definition.
I wish Paladin DAO could be seen as a positive force for transparent, decentralized, and efficient governance systems (I’m avoiding “fairness”, which is tricky). That could be reflected in a general statement, but also in the use of financing and in most other articles, that could be completed so that their scope is not strictly limited to Paladin’s internal processes.
This is something we’ve discussed a lot internally.
Paladin was built to become a postive force for other protocols, the problem is, how do you define positive ?
My take from this :
The DAO can judge whether an act is positive in Financing operation by prioritizing retroactive grants; → Add it to Article 4
The Constitution was written to have an as broad as possible impact on the ecosystem without running interference, which means it only concerns actions that pass through the Paladin Protocol(s)
Extremely hard to find or be an impartial judge for vote loans, how would you see this work ?
That’s an extremely complicated question tbh. I do think context could play a lot in the interpretation of a specific case.
The more information we can gather, the clearer a break of the code of conduct can be clear
