AIP: governance-voting Title: Referendum on Establishing Governance Author: Amir Taaki <firstname.lastname@example.org> Status: Draft Type: Process Created: 2022-02-18
To begin the next phase of transferring power of AssangeDAO to the community, we should begin the first round of snapshot governance voting.
The focus of the initial round will be on the core questions of:
- Core mission and focus of the DAO. Whether it should expand focus to the wider cause of justice and liberation or stay a pure Assange DAO.
- Clarifying the relation of the DAO with the consensus unit.
- Operation and running of the communication channels.
Many people feel that AssangeDAO has achieved a historic sense of purpose with raising $50 million for Assange’s legal case. But the big question of where the DAO wishes to head next remains.
One section believes that the cause of justice is defined above all else by Assange and the DAO must remained focused on this single issue.
Others believe the DAO has a big future fighting for truth and justice, having achieved a great victory with Assange’s case with many more prisoners of conscience and causes of justice remaining unaddressed.
Further there are calls for transparency for the consensus unit and feelings of unilateral decisions made without proper community consultation. There’s also calls for increased transparency and fairer moderation of communication channels.
This AIP does not address the important issues of:
- Voting parameters & mechanisms which must be clarified.
- Multisig governance and elections.
Here are the propsed snapshot questions.
Should the DAO only act to support the legal struggle of Assange or pursue other tactics to liberate Assange?
- Legal only
- Other avenues
Should the DAO also concern itself with other prisoners of conscience?
- Expand mission to justice including Assange
- Remain focused only on Assange
How much should the DAO remain focused on Assange?
Should the DAO rebrand to JusticeDAO?
What should the consensus unit be called?
- Assange family
- Consensus unit
- Advisory council
What should be the role of the Assange family in the DAO?
- Normal participants
- Extended status / limited veto
- Absolute veto
(In the event of #2 above, there will be another series of votes.
If #3 is voted on, then nothing changes about the current governance structure.)
Should the consensus unit include a quorum of non-family community members to avoid conflicts of interest?
- Require consensus from a quorum
- Leave the members of the consensus unit intact
(Method of selection for community members will have to be decided upon later.)
Should the DAO establish a direct line of communication with Assange through his lawyers given its substantial interest in his case?
- Important requirement
- Not necessary
Should the DAO request formal reports on the use of donated funds by the Wau Holland foundation?
Should moderators be required to apply a system of time-outs, and warnings before being allowed to explicitly ban people?
Should the DAO adopt a code of conduct to evenly moderate speech in official channels?
Should all bans be removed upon adopting a code of conduct?
Should bans be limited in time?