Proposal: Community Guidelines & Moderator Code of Conduct

General
1

Proposal: Community Guidelines & Moderator Code of Conduct

Summary

This proposal establishes a clear, enforceable framework for community behavior and moderation. It defines (1) the Community Guidelines—purpose, core values, conduct standards, reporting/appeals, and an enforcement ladder; and (2) a Moderator Code of Conduct—roles, responsibilities, constraints, transparency, accountability, and training. The goal is a safe, inclusive, and principled space governed by predictable rules and fair processes.

Motivation

Healthy communities don’t happen by accident—they’re designed. Ambiguity about acceptable behavior or ad-hoc enforcement erodes trust, distracts from mission-aligned work, and exposes members to harm. This proposal codifies shared norms, clarifies moderator duties and limits, and introduces lightweight but effective operational safeguards against abuse, spam, and coordinated disruption, while centering values associated with Julian Assange: truth, transparency, and defense of human rights and free expression (within the bounds of safety and law).

Proposal Details

Community Guidelines

I. Purpose & Core Values

Our community exists to provide a safe, inclusive, constructive, and sustainable space for all members. Everyone shares the responsibility to maintain order, respect others, and communicate with reason.

Core Values
  • Respect: Respect differing viewpoints, identities, and cultural backgrounds; respect different political positions and ideologies.
  • Integrity: No false, misleading, or malicious content.
  • Co-building: Every member helps create the community’s order and atmosphere.
  • Safety: Protect information security and psychological safety.

II. Code of Conduct

1) Speech & Content
Encouraged Content
  1. Content aligned with Julian Assange’s cause and values.
  2. Reasonable expression of opinions, sharing experiences, and raising questions.
  3. Professional, fact-based discussions focused on problems and evidence.
  4. Constructive suggestions or criticism.
Prohibited Content
  1. Publishing false or misleading information (e.g., fabricated screenshots or evidence).
  2. Deepfakes that impersonate real people or fabricated/combined evidence without disclosure; such content must be clearly labeled “AI-generated / synthetic.”
  3. Off-topic posts, malicious agenda-pushing, spamming, or irrelevant quarrels.
  4. Personal attacks, insults, harassment, discrimination, racist remarks, hate speech, or threats.
  5. Malicious provocation, sarcasm in bad faith, or deliberate flame-baiting.
  6. Propagation of state ideology.
  7. Rumors or the disclosure of others’ personal information (doxxing).
  8. Content that could trigger real-world risk (e.g., organizing fights, stalking).
  9. Phishing links or scam messages.
  10. Content involving violence, pornography, political incitement, terrorism, or other illegal material.
Definitions / Clarifications
  • Illegal content: Promotion of extreme violence/terrorism, illegal transactions, sex/gambling/drugs, exploitation or endangerment of minors, etc.
  • Hate & harassment: Attacks or mockery based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability, etc.
  • Scams: Pyramid schemes/ponzis, “managed investing” or entrusted trading, phishing links, impersonating support staff, etc.
  • Others’ privacy: Addresses, phone numbers, ID documents, geolocation, itineraries, and similar personal data.
2) Advertising & Promotion

Officially approved partners may post vetted promotional content; users should share projects, events, or works only in designated areas.

Prohibited: Unapproved ads, recruiting, pyramid schemes; stealth advertising disguised as “experience sharing”; repeated or spam-style promotions.

3) Reporting & Appeals

Members may submit reports via the designated section or the in-product Report feature.

Penalized members may appeal in the designated section or via DM to a Mod. If a simple majority (>50%) of moderators approve the appeal, the account will be unbanned.

III. Enforcement Framework

Minor Violations: Violations of Prohibited Content items 1–2.
Actions: Warning and/or content removal.

Moderate Violations: Violations of items 3–5.
Actions: Warning, 24 hours mute, and/or content removal.

Major Violations: Violations of items 6–7.
Actions: 3–7 days mute and/or content removal.

Severe Violations: Violations of items 8–10 and any prohibited advertising/promotion behavior.
Actions: Permanent ban and content removal.

Cumulative Violations:
Three minor violations → handled as moderate.
Three moderate violations → handled as major.
Three major violations → handled as severe.

Moderator Code of Conduct

I. Role Definition

Moderators maintain order and enforce rules fairly—they are not “power holders.” Their duty is to serve the community, apply the rules, and facilitate consensus.

II. Core Responsibilities

  • Maintaining Order
    Handle violations promptly.
    Avoid selective enforcement or emotion-driven management.

  • Fair Adjudication
    Review facts and evidence before acting.
    Apply consistent standards: same case, same penalty.

  • Communication & Feedback
    Penalties must include reasons and rule references.
    Remain neutral and respectful in public explanations.

  • Records & Archival
    Log all warnings, mutes, and bans in the designated channel or thread for audit.
    Escalate contentious cases for discussion by the full moderator group.

III. Behavioral Constraints

Moderators must not:

  • Abuse authority, favor friends, or retaliate against users.
  • Disclose backend data or internal discussions without authorization.
  • Seek personal gain by invoking their moderator status.
  • Unilaterally change rules or penalty standards.
  • Delete (or instruct others to delete) reasoned criticism directed at themselves.
  • Ban others due to differing political views or ideologies.
  • Violate any prohibitions set out in the Community Guidelines.

IV. Transparency

  • All bans, unbans, and major penalties must be announced in the designated channel or thread.
  • External communications must remain neutral and free of personal color.

V. Accountability

  • Minor Mistakes: Wrongful bans, poor communication.
    Measures: Written warning and review/learning.

  • Serious Negligence: Abuse of power, discrimination, falsification.
    Measures: Suspension and/or removal of moderator status.

  • Malicious Conduct: Leaks, self-dealing, internal/external collusion.
    Measures: Permanent removal and public notice.

VI. Ongoing Training

  • New moderators must complete onboarding training.
  • Hold a quarterly “Policy Updates & Case Review” meeting.
  • Encourage mutual supervision, peer review, and mutual assistance among moderators.

Attack Mitigation

Reduce harm from raids, brigading, spam/scams, sockpuppets, and coordinated disinformation—while minimizing friction for legitimate members.

Alignment with Julian

This is a governance proposal aimed at bringing order and regularity to community discussions—while prioritizing safety and legality.

Communication & Moderation

Channels: Governance forum, Discord/Telegram announcements, monthly community call (optional) during Discussion phase.

Moderation policy: code of conduct enforced; off-topic, abusive, spam, or duplicate threads may be merged or removed with moderator note; repeated bad-faith actors can be rate-limited.

Conclusion

Adopting this proposal will provide members with clear expectations and protections. Give moderators principled limits, due-process requirements, and an operational playbook. Reduce community risk from abuse, scams, and coordinated attacks while preserving open, mission-aligned discourse.

2 Likes
2

If the multi-sign selection rules and financial management system have been shelved due to the current shortage of staff, I don’t believe this proposal faces these issues.

It was precisely this lack of metrics that led to previous controversy surrounding moderator enforcement. It was also the lack of moderator accountability that allowed those who abused their power to remain at large, while those who enforced the regulations impartially were punished.

3

I think this is good and a preamble about general expectations could be added to each communication channel to be part of the blurb that moderators can link to - to justify their mod decisions. That would help the mods from having to repeat themselves in their explanations to a poster.

A preamble summarising general etiquette for this forum could be added to this section under About.

image
image401×292 16 KB

Or it could go here - Off Topic - AssangeDAO

It should be visible. Not too difficult to find.

I presume flagged posts could be resubmitted if the user tones them down by editing to be within community etiquette rules. [Minor Violations: Violations of Prohibited Content items 1–2. Actions: Warning and/or content removal.]

Good elements were contained back here - FAQ - Free Assange DAO

That is

Be Agreeable, Even When You Disagree

You may wish to respond by disagreeing. That’s fine. But remember to criticize ideas, not people. Please avoid:

  • Name-calling

  • Ad hominem attacks

  • Responding to a post’s tone instead of its actual content

  • Knee-jerk contradiction

Instead, provide thoughtful insights that improve the conversation.

Always Be Civil

Nothing sabotages a healthy conversation like rudeness:

  • Be civil. Don’t post anything that a reasonable person would consider offensive, abusive, or hate speech.

  • Keep it clean. Don’t post anything obscene or sexually explicit.

  • Respect each other. Don’t harass or grief anyone, impersonate people, or expose their private information.

  • Respect our forum. Don’t post spam or otherwise vandalize the forum.

These are not concrete terms with precise definitions — avoid even the appearance of any of these things. If you’re unsure, ask yourself how you would feel if your post was featured on the front page of a major news site.

This is a public forum, and search engines index these discussions. Keep the language, links, and images safe for family and friends.

Keep It Tidy

Make the effort to put things in the right place, so that we can spend more time discussing and less cleaning up. So:

  • Don’t start a topic in the wrong category; please read the category definitions.

  • Don’t cross-post the same thing in multiple topics.

  • Don’t post no-content replies.

  • Don’t divert a topic by changing it midstream.

2 Likes
4

The content has too many details, and I haven’t remembered much. different interpretations of specific rules may lead to varied execution outcomes. person A might consider this acceptable, while person B could impose a one-day ban on the other party, and 35 might handle it according to the strictest standard.

Based on my long-term conflicts with 35, if he continues to act as a moderator, I wouldn’t have the opportunity to keep speaking here. If this proposal passes, 35 should not serve as a mod—this would leave you trapped in ongoing controversies, triggering the same turbulence as before. a more community-accepted individual is needed to manage community order.

Additionally, 35, could you help us establish a management framework for multisigers and proposers? Over the past six months, we haven’t seen much activity from them, which has raised concerns about their performance of duties. we lack proper guidelines in this regard.

5

According to the Multisig Signer Charter I authored, Chapter 3 contains provisions regarding the impeachment of multisig signers. Should the DAO vote to implement this proposal, multisig signers will be bound by these provisions.

6

I base my enforcement solely on existing community rules, and I have logged every action I’ve taken in the Discord mod channel. You can review these records at any time. I typically take appropriate measures against members who violate rules multiple times, and I have not punished anyone for criticizing me personally.

7

If you carefully review my records (each accompanied by screenshots), you’ll find even you been a moderator, you would have taken action against them.

8

Let me tell you why the Chinese community turned hostile toward me. @sudongpo

At the very beginning, no one criticized my strict measures. BZ even asked me to get involved in their internal feud, asking me to ban 币圣 and his guys. That was the first time I refused him. The second refusal came when I banned the following members, and BZ demanded I restore his status. Out of responsibility for my position, I declined. Since then, it’s no surprise I became the enemy of the Chinese community.

Screenshot_2022-05-12_at_21.28.29-1
Screenshot_2022-05-12_at_21.28.29-11920×998 168 KB

9

I am more interested in the accountability aspect, but we don’t yet have many detailed rules. For instance, if multisigers are consistently absent from the forum , fail to submit any proposals for community discussion, do not actively participate in other community governance discussions, are unable to engage positively with community members, are unreachable, or exhibit passive resistance—such behaviors demonstrate an extremely low willingness to fulfill their duties. We know nothing about their perspectives on critical matters. Such conduct has been quite common over the past three years. Once community governance is on track, we must take firm action against these behaviors. We need specific data metrics to measure their performance. Warnings should be issued to those who have never submitted proposals and rarely interact with the community. Once the community’s tolerance threshold is breached, we will initiate the removal process for the individuals involved.

10

hi,bro,there have been many painful experiences in the past. Regardless of right or wrong, what’s done is done. Can we agree to stop discussing and dwelling on past mistakes, and instead focus on moving forward?