Profile of 0xWeston in Optimism

Posts by 0xWeston

• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 24, 2024, 7:21 p.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T - ok… thanks for following up here. I think I understand, but this is also still quite a bit unclear to me to be frank. I will go ahead and get my responses submitted then for the CoCC review and look forward to hearing about resolution. I’m wondering though and still lost as to the vote you mention on the cycle 19 - from an outside perspective it appears as if someone filed a complaint at the very last minute, it was then even voted on (if I am reading correctly here?) all the while I was asking clarifying questions about this process? This just is not sitting well with me, especially when considering the email I received on 21 / 2 was in reference to a resubmission of the prior complaint from Alex. I feel that given the circumstances now, it is reasonable to point out that - although you have made it clear there were open office hours before of which Jack and Alex were in attendance and which there is no record of as well, I have attended many different Optimism events various times… and I would have without a doubt attended this one had I been made aware of it - so being that the CoCC is set to resolve it and another party to the complaint was in fact in attendance and given an opportunity to speak verbally with the CoCC, I deserve a similar right, and I would maintain anyone in this scenario would be entitled to this, given the circumstances. So: I will go ahead and submit the formal written correspondence, but am wondering if anyone from the CoCC or the CoCC itself would be available to speak with me today as well - if only even briefly -to clarify and touch base on some items. I can be reached via Telegram, Discord, X, and would be available for a call on any platform as well. Thanks again, Weston
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 24, 2024, 2:21 p.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T - ok… thanks for following up here. I think I understand, but this is also still quite a bit unclear to me to be frank. I will go ahead and get my responses submitted then for the CoCC review and look forward to hearing about resolution. I’m wondering though and still lost as to the vote you mention on the cycle 19 - from an outside perspective it appears as if someone filed a complaint at the very last minute, it was then even voted on (if I am reading correctly here?) all the while I was asking clarifying questions about this process? This just is not sitting well with me, especially when considering the email I received on 21 / 2 was in reference to a resubmission of the prior complaint from Alex. I feel that given the circumstances now, it is reasonable to point out that - although you have made it clear there were open office hours before of which Jack and Alex were in attendance and which there is no record of as well, I have attended many different Optimism events various times… and I would have without a doubt attended this one had I been made aware of it - so being that the CoCC is set to resolve it and another party to the complaint was in fact in attendance and given an opportunity to speak verbally with the CoCC, I deserve a similar right, and I would maintain anyone in this scenario would be entitled to this, given the circumstances. So: I will go ahead and submit the formal written correspondence, but am wondering if anyone from the CoCC or the CoCC itself would be available to speak with me today as well - if only even briefly -to clarify and touch base on some items. I can be reached via Telegram, Discord, X, and would be available for a call on any platform as well. Thanks again, Weston
  Likes: 0 Replies: 0
  No likes yet.
  No replies yet.
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 23, 2024, 4:22 a.m.
  Content: Ok then… understood. :+ 1 :
  Likes: 1 Replies: 1
  Likers: axel_t
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: Hi @0xWeston Pinging you here about 24 hours later. I don’t think any emails were sent out by our Council Lead yesterday. After deciding on a plan of action about 30 hours ago, the discussions here and in Discord revolving around the CoCC (about 24 hours ago) ended up swamping and crowding out the Council’s work time, deliberations and actions since then. This new, unexpected work had to be prioritised over the 24-hour deadline that I had single-handedly set without any prior discussion or approval from the full CoCC. Further, I am limited in what I can say here because the Council didn’t fully support my responses yesterday & essentially engaging in individual discussions on a personal account as opposed to having the official CoCC Discourse Forum account formally reply to your posts. But I still wanted to get back to you within the 24 hours as I said I would. To try and be as straight-forward and clear as possible: I was not able to get permission to publicly publish the details of the informal vote and rationale I mentioned yesterday Axel_T: Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint” The assumption I mentioned yesterday was incorrect. Axel_T: (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. To provide more context to point (2): An informal vote was taken by the CoCC on how to handle the Voting Cycle 19 complaint against you and any future similar complaints. I cannot yet provide details to you, or the community as a whole, about this new/different complaint handling procedure, or even commit to its implementation, as details have not yet been formalised or even agreed upon as to if & when to make them public. While all deliberations and decisions are in ‘black & white’, the time pressure here mean that things appear fluid in comparison to what would otherwise be, and thus I cannot yet give you a definitive answer as to whether any new complaint handling procedure will apply to you and the complaint against you made in Voting Cycle 19. In other words, the CoCC made an informal, internal decision 30 hours ago and expected to have time to refine this concept, confirm its implementation & share the decision publicly in due course. But then this discussion blew up here and on Discord about 28 hours ago. And then I went out on my own and promised you an answer regarding this internal decision 24 hours ago. Thus, this chain of events has caused tough-to-handle time pressures & possibly exposed some of the internal mechanics of the CoCC in the public Discourse when it would have been far, far better for the CoCC to not have these time pressures created by me & you, and to instead have the CoCC publicly announce any decision in due course after reasonable refinements and clarity could be added. WHAT I’M GETTING AT HERE: Without being able to offer your perfect clarity right now within the 24-hours, it would be best to cover all bases, allow the CoCC to adhere to it’s Internal Operating Procedures (IOPs), and still have you respond to the CoCC questions by the 25/2 (when the IOPs state the response window closes). Beyond this, I cannot say much more or predict what will happen in the future. Just that the response time window will close on 25/2 as stated by CoCC correspondence from two days ago, 0xWeston: explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25/2 to proceed. and that you should consider this path still in play, and should follow this timeline for any response to cover all bases. I hope this response meets the deadline to wait that I requested. And I hope you continue to engage with the CoCC by providing the requested response by the 25/2. All the best and Stay Optimistic!
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 23, 2024, 3:52 a.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T thanks again for thorough communication here. But now I’m further confused here by your comment about a decision being made. The last correspondence I received from the CoCC regarding mediation explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25 / 2 to proceed. Can you please confirm which is correct?
  Likes: 1 Replies: 2
  Likers: axel_t
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: @0xWeston Because this decision on how to handle this complaint was so recent (it occurred about 6 or 7 hours ago, late in the night of American time zone hours) I don’t feel comfortable outlining the decision when it hasn’t been communicated to the affected parties by our Council Lead (who’s responsibility it is to send these emails). Please can you just wait 24 hours? I’ll ping you again here in 24 hours, and check if it’s all clear then. I hope this works. I’m sorry, it’s just not my place to be doing the communications here, with affected parties. Please just give it 24 hours, and I’ll ping you here again tomorrow to see if you got the email from our Council Lead. What I believe I can say though: (a) We did not make a final decision on the complaint, we simply made a decision on how to handle and approach this complaint. (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. But I’ll ping you in 24-hours to see if it’s clearer, and before then I’ll confirm with the other CoCC members and Lead if my just stated assumption is correct. Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint”, so the whole community can see how future, similar complaints will be handled. Sorry for not being fully clear here, I hope you can understand when I’m only one member of the group, not the Lead, and not yet sure what I can post publicly & what I can’t.
  • Axel_T: Hi @0xWeston Pinging you here about 24 hours later. I don’t think any emails were sent out by our Council Lead yesterday. After deciding on a plan of action about 30 hours ago, the discussions here and in Discord revolving around the CoCC (about 24 hours ago) ended up swamping and crowding out the Council’s work time, deliberations and actions since then. This new, unexpected work had to be prioritised over the 24-hour deadline that I had single-handedly set without any prior discussion or approval from the full CoCC. Further, I am limited in what I can say here because the Council didn’t fully support my responses yesterday & essentially engaging in individual discussions on a personal account as opposed to having the official CoCC Discourse Forum account formally reply to your posts. But I still wanted to get back to you within the 24 hours as I said I would. To try and be as straight-forward and clear as possible: I was not able to get permission to publicly publish the details of the informal vote and rationale I mentioned yesterday Axel_T: Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint” The assumption I mentioned yesterday was incorrect. Axel_T: (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. To provide more context to point (2): An informal vote was taken by the CoCC on how to handle the Voting Cycle 19 complaint against you and any future similar complaints. I cannot yet provide details to you, or the community as a whole, about this new/different complaint handling procedure, or even commit to its implementation, as details have not yet been formalised or even agreed upon as to if & when to make them public. While all deliberations and decisions are in ‘black & white’, the time pressure here mean that things appear fluid in comparison to what would otherwise be, and thus I cannot yet give you a definitive answer as to whether any new complaint handling procedure will apply to you and the complaint against you made in Voting Cycle 19. In other words, the CoCC made an informal, internal decision 30 hours ago and expected to have time to refine this concept, confirm its implementation & share the decision publicly in due course. But then this discussion blew up here and on Discord about 28 hours ago. And then I went out on my own and promised you an answer regarding this internal decision 24 hours ago. Thus, this chain of events has caused tough-to-handle time pressures & possibly exposed some of the internal mechanics of the CoCC in the public Discourse when it would have been far, far better for the CoCC to not have these time pressures created by me & you, and to instead have the CoCC publicly announce any decision in due course after reasonable refinements and clarity could be added. WHAT I’M GETTING AT HERE: Without being able to offer your perfect clarity right now within the 24-hours, it would be best to cover all bases, allow the CoCC to adhere to it’s Internal Operating Procedures (IOPs), and still have you respond to the CoCC questions by the 25/2 (when the IOPs state the response window closes). Beyond this, I cannot say much more or predict what will happen in the future. Just that the response time window will close on 25/2 as stated by CoCC correspondence from two days ago, 0xWeston: explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25/2 to proceed. and that you should consider this path still in play, and should follow this timeline for any response to cover all bases. I hope this response meets the deadline to wait that I requested. And I hope you continue to engage with the CoCC by providing the requested response by the 25/2. All the best and Stay Optimistic!
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 23, 2024, 3:21 a.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T Thank you very much for taking the time and answering so thoroughly. I found this extremely informative and helpful. I sincerely appreciate this and it does provide a lot of clarity I was seeking. I would love to connect with the CoCC on a call to further clear up any outstanding concerns / questions or issues. Thanks again, Weston
  Likes: 1 Replies: 0
  Likers: axel_t
  No replies yet.
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 23, 2024, 12:04 a.m.
  Content: I added additional context in the first post, below for review, and recently followed up with further questions which are also below: I’m also wondering if anyone can shed some light on this specifically: Screencap 1 is the findings of this council back from January, that they marked Resolved and Decisions were made. These were already old cases as it were, which was acknowledged. Straightforward enough. But then… I was confused to receive an email yesterday (screencap 2 ) - as they were responding to the wrong thread :confused: it turns out - which included all my prior correspondence I’d had with the council. Saying… oh your file has been resubmitted against you? This breaks your own charter and undermines your own ruling from over a month ago. I have not been in discussions with anything OP related since this prior decision was announced. There is no basis for this, and also seeing the Council has a group discussion with Jack and Alex (screencap 3 ) - so 8 members in total - (I did not receive an invite) it also highlights why I was confused to receive it upon reading their was an office hours with the individuals who have filed the complaint against me? And are both Delegates? AND have received >$ 10 M $USD in grant funding from the OP Collective? And receiving praise from the CoCC members publicicly in said forum already? If this is what it appears to be - it is flat out corruption, and I want nothing to do with it, nor be a part of this in anyway. I don’t think I need to say anymore. Please stop contacting me, harassing me on social media, and threatening me with deadlines for items publicly acknowledged as resolved. Most recent post following up: Hi all, I am still waiting for a response directly from the CoCC here to what was presented above. <@ 898943373812039721 > <@ 705912745614376971 > <@ 336423896599232512 > <@ 506075561609789441 > + the remaining 2 members of the Council. Additionally I am asking for an explicitly clear answer for: Why was this call not recorded and made publicly accessible immediately upon conclusion if active mediation parties were being discussed and one was not present or even aware of the call? Under what circumstance would the CoCC - or any civic council for that matter - deem it reasonable conduct to host their inaugural kick off call and proceed to include someone who is a party of their first active mediation case set for resolution? And then as demonstrably shown here, this individual was not acting as a subject for review, but clearly being treated as more so part of the committee itself? When was the date set for when the CoCC was planning to offer me the same opportunity to speak live in a one-to-one setting? I have offered this many times over the past year - but this opportunity has not been made available to myself and seeing that this occurred for the other party is unsettling as to the nature/intent of the entire process. As always I can be reached: on X @ westonnelson, Telegram @ westonnelson, Discord @ westonnelson Thank you. Looking forward to some insights here. Thanks again.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 2
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: 0xWeston: Hi all, I am still waiting for a response directly from the CoCC here to what was presented above. <@898943373812039721> <@705912745614376971> <@336423896599232512> <@506075561609789441> + the remaining 2 members of the Council. Additionally I am asking for an explicitly clear answer for: Why was this call not recorded and made publicly accessible immediately upon conclusion if active mediation parties were being discussed and one was not present or even aware of the call? Under what circumstance would the CoCC - or any civic council for that matter - deem it reasonable conduct to host their inaugural kick off call and proceed to include someone who is a party of their first active mediation case set for resolution? And then as demonstrably shown here, this individual was not acting as a subject for review, but clearly being treated as more so part of the committee itself? When was the date set for when the CoCC was planning to offer me the same opportunity to speak live in a one-to-one setting? I have offered this many times over the past year - but this opportunity has not been made available to myself and seeing that this occurred for the other party is unsettling as to the nature/intent of the entire process. As always I can be reached: on X @ westonnelson, Telegram @ westonnelson, Discord @ westonnelson Thank you. Hi @0xWeston and anyone interested. I’ll start with this question block first. The meeting your discussing was our first free to attend, no restriction, public ‘Office Hours’. These Office Hours are similar to how other Councils and grouping hold Office Hours. This was NOT a ‘private meeting’ for anyone in particular, but a time that was set aside on the OP Governance Calendar and advertised both in Discord and Discourse. While there were some in attendance who were complainants & subject to complaints, there was also attendees who were just members of the community. You, of course, like all public Office Hours, were free to attend, like anyone else in the community was. While at the time I personally didn’t have the technical capacity or permission to record the meeting, I can only assume this meeting wasn’t recorded because some attendees wanted privacy and to be anon, considering the complaints & decisions were being discussed. However, I understand any lack of recording could cause you to distrust what was discussed at the public, advertised, open Office Hours, and I can see your point here. Thus, I will make recommend & try to implement a change that any future Office Hours are recorded and then posted here in Discourse. I hope this response to your feedback is seen as a sign of accountability & transparency to you and the rest of the community. In regards to your point (2), I must reiterate that this was a public Office Hours session, and we could not forbid anyone from attending. Any attendees were not being part of a Council, but they were instead asking questions of the CoCC which we had to answer & defend. We were being held accountable for our decisions and actions, like we are here as I write this reply. It was akin to a Q&A session, in a Google Meets forum, similar to the Q&A you’ve demanded here in the Discourse Forum. As for your Point 3: I urge you attend future Office Hours. You, along with all other community members, are encouraged and free to attend these Office Hours. There was your opportunity to attend last time, and there is your opportunity to attend next time. While you say you have offered this many times over the past year, it should be noted (a) the CoCC only came into force in 2024, and (b) the CoCC has found you to be relatively unresponsive to contact, for e.g. you had not reponded to our initial mediation goal questions (an early step in mediation to assess what all parties wanted in any mediation) and you had not responded to notices about our public office hours, nor attended this session (FYI: It would have been a much better Office Hours session if you had attended). I hope these initial answers to this first block of questions helps you understand our processes a bit better. We are here to be held fairly accountable, and ultimately offer transparency, and display our integrity & independence. If you don’t see this yourself, yet, then I hope these initial responses are helpful for the community or at least provide the community some more context. All the best.
  • Axel_T: 0xWeston: I’m also wondering if anyone can shed some light on this specifically: Screencap 1 is the findings of this council back from January, that they marked Resolved and Decisions were made. These were already old cases as it were, which was acknowledged. Straightforward enough. But then… I was confused to receive an email yesterday (screencap 2) - as they were responding to the wrong thread it turns out - which included all my prior correspondence I’d had with the council. Saying… oh your file has been resubmitted against you? This breaks your own charter and undermines your own ruling from over a month ago. I have not been in discussions with anything OP related since this prior decision was announced. There is no basis for this, and also seeing the Council has a group discussion with Jack and Alex (screencap 3) - so 8 members in total - (I did not receive an invite) it also highlights why I was confused to receive it upon reading their was an office hours with the individuals who have filed the complaint against me? And are both Delegates? AND have received >$10M $USD in grant funding from the OP Collective? And receiving praise from the CoCC members publicicly in said forum already? If this is what it appears to be - it is flat out corruption, and I want nothing to do with it, nor be a part of this in anyway. I don’t think I need to say anymore. Please stop contacting me, harassing me on social media, and threatening me with deadlines for items publicly acknowledged as resolved. Okay, finally with this block, @0xWeston Noting that it’s only been me posting here so far (most likely because of my Asian time zone hours), so I welcome any of the other five CoCC members adding more context and positions here and with everything else I’ve replied about. I.e. I am only one of six CoCC and cannot speak for the whole group, but I am prioritising responding to you fast as you have complained about a lack of responsiveness. Quote Block 1. Yes, there were an initial batch of legacy cases that had to be resolved & decided upon in Voting Cycle 17. These cases weren’t exactly straightforward and involved a great deal of research and debate, and none of the decisions in that batch were unanimous, but yes ‘straightforward enough’ in a sesnse that a decision was made by a vote in the CoCC, the decisions were published, and then the decisions were put up to vote in the Token House to see if they needed to be vetoed. Quote Block 2. In Voting Cycle 19, we received another complaint & claimed breach against you. All I will say right now is (a) Please wait for correspondence after a subsequent decision (by informal vote) was made by the CoCC only 6 hours ago, and (b) While I want to maintain the privacy of the inner workings of the CoCC, I can reassure you that this new complaint against you has led to a long and heated debate amongst CoCC members. We weren’t initially sure how to handle this complaint, and this being the inaugural Season with CoCC, we didn’t have the procedures and policies in place to know how to handle this 2nd complaint. This lack of policy or Charter direction has been a bone of contention in the the new CoCC, has lead to a great deal of (ideally positive, growth oriented) conflict among CoCC members. Just for now, please refer back to seaction “(a)” a few sentences earlier, and please know that very little or nothing in the CoCC is a fait accompli. We are doing our best, as part-time, modestly paid council members, all with our own career and household responsibilities, to devise policies and procedures to handle corner cases and resolve deep, long held disputes amoung community members, all without a long history of precedence and embedded policies & frameworks to rely upon. In it’s most short, please ‘cut us a little slack’ as we build this plane while it’s already flying. Quote Block 3: I think some of these issues have been discussed in my earlier answers, but yes, I can see your confusion in the process. It is likely hard to fully keep up to date unless you dedicate your life to Optimism (which very few do) or had full visability into the inner workings of the CoCC (which no one does outside the CoCC members). In short (a) I understand your confusion (b) I genuinely believe that none of us are corrupt, but I believe this accusation can slide because you’re confused and upset (c) Active community members are indeed praised, because we welcome engagement and appreciate and respect feedback (in fact, I hope I’m communicating you with the same courtesy that all CoCC members should treat all community members, and thanking you for your feedback), and (d) you are not obliged to respond to or maintain contact with the CoCC at anytime, you can block any and all of us at anytime, but ultimately were just trying to shape and follow our new Internal Operating Procedures, our Charter, and any other policies and procedures. I believe open contact improves decision-making and outcomes, but you are NOT obliged to participate. It’s just that zero contact may mean the CoCC follows procedures and makes decisions without your input. I hope this answer helps, and can cover the final section of Quote Blocks that hadn’t yet been covered by my other answers. Final Note: Again, I am only 1 of 6, and other CoCC members might jump in here too when they wake up (most are in the American time zone, with one of us also in the European time zone). All the best.
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 23, 2024, 12:02 a.m.
  Content: Hi all adding to the discussion for reference here from the Discord CoCC channel. I originally posted in Discord earlier: Whoa new channel! :thinking: Noticed there are some conflicting items here where major and unquestionable conflicts of interest already exist. I see that each CoCC member receives ~$ 12 , 000 per season so it would stand to reason the CoCC gets started on the right foot and not be seen as some sort of shadow group able to cancel anyone at anytime, which is at it is appearing right now. Wondering what the feedback mechanism is here for accountability, and if there are 6 individual members, what was the process for election and how their votes will be transparent enough to be recorded onchain whether via Snapshot or an attestation. Thanks. I have not heard back anything from the CoCC.
  Likes: 0 Replies: 2
  No likes yet.
  Replies:

  • 0xWeston: I added additional context in the first post, below for review, and recently followed up with further questions which are also below: I’m also wondering if anyone can shed some light on this specifically: Screencap 1 is the findings of this council back from January, that they marked Resolved and Decisions were made. These were already old cases as it were, which was acknowledged. Straightforward enough. But then… I was confused to receive an email yesterday (screencap 2) - as they were responding to the wrong thread it turns out - which included all my prior correspondence I’d had with the council. Saying… oh your file has been resubmitted against you? This breaks your own charter and undermines your own ruling from over a month ago. I have not been in discussions with anything OP related since this prior decision was announced. There is no basis for this, and also seeing the Council has a group discussion with Jack and Alex (screencap 3) - so 8 members in total - (I did not receive an invite) it also highlights why I was confused to receive it upon reading their was an office hours with the individuals who have filed the complaint against me? And are both Delegates? AND have received >$10M $USD in grant funding from the OP Collective? And receiving praise from the CoCC members publicicly in said forum already? If this is what it appears to be - it is flat out corruption, and I want nothing to do with it, nor be a part of this in anyway. I don’t think I need to say anymore. Please stop contacting me, harassing me on social media, and threatening me with deadlines for items publicly acknowledged as resolved. Most recent post following up: Hi all, I am still waiting for a response directly from the CoCC here to what was presented above. <@898943373812039721> <@705912745614376971> <@336423896599232512> <@506075561609789441> + the remaining 2 members of the Council. Additionally I am asking for an explicitly clear answer for: Why was this call not recorded and made publicly accessible immediately upon conclusion if active mediation parties were being discussed and one was not present or even aware of the call? Under what circumstance would the CoCC - or any civic council for that matter - deem it reasonable conduct to host their inaugural kick off call and proceed to include someone who is a party of their first active mediation case set for resolution? And then as demonstrably shown here, this individual was not acting as a subject for review, but clearly being treated as more so part of the committee itself? When was the date set for when the CoCC was planning to offer me the same opportunity to speak live in a one-to-one setting? I have offered this many times over the past year - but this opportunity has not been made available to myself and seeing that this occurred for the other party is unsettling as to the nature/intent of the entire process. As always I can be reached: on X @ westonnelson, Telegram @ westonnelson, Discord @ westonnelson Thank you. Looking forward to some insights here. Thanks again.
  • Axel_T: 0xWeston: Hi all adding to the discussion for reference here from the Discord CoCC channel. I originally posted in Discord earlier: Whoa new channel! Noticed there are some conflicting items here where major and unquestionable conflicts of interest already exist. I see that each CoCC member receives ~$12,000 per season so it would stand to reason the CoCC gets started on the right foot and not be seen as some sort of shadow group able to cancel anyone at anytime, which is at it is appearing right now. Wondering what the feedback mechanism is here for accountability, and if there are 6 individual members, what was the process for election and how their votes will be transparent enough to be recorded onchain whether via Snapshot or an attestation. Thanks. I have not heard back anything from the CoCC. Hi again @0xWeston Yes, each CoCC member earns a stipend of 3,000 OP. This is meant to incentivise applications to the Council and be reimbursement for the time dedicated to the Council. For you, and anyone else interested, this period of work has lasted since early December 2023 and will last to May 2024, so the stipend is for about 5 months work. The CoCC usually meets weekly, has discussions in Telegram daily, and has deadlines set by it’s Charter and our own Internal Operating Procedures. This is not to mention dedicating time & resources to understand, review and decide upon all complaints and claims of a breach of the CoCC. You will see from the published Reports we are required to make information public about the cases we have had to look into, and list other tasks & systems we’ve needed to arrange as part of the inaugural Code of Conduct Council (CoCC). So yes, were are compensated with OP, but this does not lead to a conflict of interest, but instead incentivises a higher than would be workload, and help maintains our integrity & independence by knowing we can be self-sufficient and not susceptible to financial inducements. In regards to your second point, and accountability and member elections: The CoCC is held accountable here on on the Discourse Forum, whether it is your questioning here, or via our published Summary of Enforcement Actions. We are also held accountable in our Office Hours and Discord (but speaking for myself here, I have never really used Discord much so I’m not that active there, but hope other members of the CoCC are). BUT IMPORTANTLY: We are held accountable by every one of our final decisions being put up to vote in Agora for veto. That is, after every case decision is made, voting opens up on Agora and the community has the capacity to vote and veto our decision. Ultimately, we are meant to an efficient mechanism to reduce the governance burden on delegates, but we have no power to usurp the decision making authority of delegates and the Token House. We save them time & difficulty by investigating, reviewing and adjudicating every case, but the final decision is still always up to the Token House, and if we go too far off the reservation, then they can just veto our decision. As for the process of electing CoCC Members: This was done via a Token House Election. You can find more details about all our nominations to be on the CoCC here: Code of Conduct Council Nominations: Season 5 - #8 by Axel_T And you can see the on-chain election results here: Code of Conduct Council: Member Nomin... Our election is only valid for Season 5 and I assume the same process on nominations & elections will occur for Season 6 and beyond. So this further increases accountability to the community. That is, if community members are upset or unsatisfied with our work, actions and behaviour, then they can vote any of us out next Season and vote for individuals who they think can do a better job. I’m sorry you did not get a response to these questions earlier, as a I said, I’m not very active on Discord, but hopefully the full response here within three hours can suffice.
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 22, 2024, 11:22 p.m.
  Content: Ok then… understood. :+ 1 :
  Likes: 1 Replies: 1
  Likers: Axel_T
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: Hi @0xWeston Pinging you here about 24 hours later. I don’t think any emails were sent out by our Council Lead yesterday. After deciding on a plan of action about 30 hours ago, the discussions here and in Discord revolving around the CoCC (about 24 hours ago) ended up swamping and crowding out the Council’s work time, deliberations and actions since then. This new, unexpected work had to be prioritised over the 24-hour deadline that I had single-handedly set without any prior discussion or approval from the full CoCC. Further, I am limited in what I can say here because the Council didn’t fully support my responses yesterday & essentially engaging in individual discussions on a personal account as opposed to having the official CoCC Discourse Forum account formally reply to your posts. But I still wanted to get back to you within the 24 hours as I said I would. To try and be as straight-forward and clear as possible: I was not able to get permission to publicly publish the details of the informal vote and rationale I mentioned yesterday Axel_T: Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint” The assumption I mentioned yesterday was incorrect. Axel_T: (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. To provide more context to point (2): An informal vote was taken by the CoCC on how to handle the Voting Cycle 19 complaint against you and any future similar complaints. I cannot yet provide details to you, or the community as a whole, about this new/different complaint handling procedure, or even commit to its implementation, as details have not yet been formalised or even agreed upon as to if & when to make them public. While all deliberations and decisions are in ‘black & white’, the time pressure here mean that things appear fluid in comparison to what would otherwise be, and thus I cannot yet give you a definitive answer as to whether any new complaint handling procedure will apply to you and the complaint against you made in Voting Cycle 19. In other words, the CoCC made an informal, internal decision 30 hours ago and expected to have time to refine this concept, confirm its implementation & share the decision publicly in due course. But then this discussion blew up here and on Discord about 28 hours ago. And then I went out on my own and promised you an answer regarding this internal decision 24 hours ago. Thus, this chain of events has caused tough-to-handle time pressures & possibly exposed some of the internal mechanics of the CoCC in the public Discourse when it would have been far, far better for the CoCC to not have these time pressures created by me & you, and to instead have the CoCC publicly announce any decision in due course after reasonable refinements and clarity could be added. WHAT I’M GETTING AT HERE: Without being able to offer your perfect clarity right now within the 24-hours, it would be best to cover all bases, allow the CoCC to adhere to it’s Internal Operating Procedures (IOPs), and still have you respond to the CoCC questions by the 25/2 (when the IOPs state the response window closes). Beyond this, I cannot say much more or predict what will happen in the future. Just that the response time window will close on 25/2 as stated by CoCC correspondence from two days ago, 0xWeston: explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25/2 to proceed. and that you should consider this path still in play, and should follow this timeline for any response to cover all bases. I hope this response meets the deadline to wait that I requested. And I hope you continue to engage with the CoCC by providing the requested response by the 25/2. All the best and Stay Optimistic!
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 22, 2024, 10:52 p.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T thanks again for thorough communication here. But now I’m further confused here by your comment about a decision being made. The last correspondence I received from the CoCC regarding mediation explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25 / 2 to proceed. Can you please confirm which is correct?
  Likes: 1 Replies: 2
  Likers: Axel_T
  Replies:

  • Axel_T: @0xWeston Because this decision on how to handle this complaint was so recent (it occurred about 6 or 7 hours ago, late in the night of American time zone hours) I don’t feel comfortable outlining the decision when it hasn’t been communicated to the affected parties by our Council Lead (who’s responsibility it is to send these emails). Please can you just wait 24 hours? I’ll ping you again here in 24 hours, and check if it’s all clear then. I hope this works. I’m sorry, it’s just not my place to be doing the communications here, with affected parties. Please just give it 24 hours, and I’ll ping you here again tomorrow to see if you got the email from our Council Lead. What I believe I can say though: (a) We did not make a final decision on the complaint, we simply made a decision on how to handle and approach this complaint. (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. But I’ll ping you in 24-hours to see if it’s clearer, and before then I’ll confirm with the other CoCC members and Lead if my just stated assumption is correct. Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint”, so the whole community can see how future, similar complaints will be handled. Sorry for not being fully clear here, I hope you can understand when I’m only one member of the group, not the Lead, and not yet sure what I can post publicly & what I can’t.
  • Axel_T: Hi @0xWeston Pinging you here about 24 hours later. I don’t think any emails were sent out by our Council Lead yesterday. After deciding on a plan of action about 30 hours ago, the discussions here and in Discord revolving around the CoCC (about 24 hours ago) ended up swamping and crowding out the Council’s work time, deliberations and actions since then. This new, unexpected work had to be prioritised over the 24-hour deadline that I had single-handedly set without any prior discussion or approval from the full CoCC. Further, I am limited in what I can say here because the Council didn’t fully support my responses yesterday & essentially engaging in individual discussions on a personal account as opposed to having the official CoCC Discourse Forum account formally reply to your posts. But I still wanted to get back to you within the 24 hours as I said I would. To try and be as straight-forward and clear as possible: I was not able to get permission to publicly publish the details of the informal vote and rationale I mentioned yesterday Axel_T: Ideally, within the next 24-hours I’ll also seek permission from the CoCC to be able to publish this decision here on “how to handle and approach this complaint” The assumption I mentioned yesterday was incorrect. Axel_T: (b) My assumption is, although please wait for the email, is that you won’t have to reply by the 25/2 to proceed. To provide more context to point (2): An informal vote was taken by the CoCC on how to handle the Voting Cycle 19 complaint against you and any future similar complaints. I cannot yet provide details to you, or the community as a whole, about this new/different complaint handling procedure, or even commit to its implementation, as details have not yet been formalised or even agreed upon as to if & when to make them public. While all deliberations and decisions are in ‘black & white’, the time pressure here mean that things appear fluid in comparison to what would otherwise be, and thus I cannot yet give you a definitive answer as to whether any new complaint handling procedure will apply to you and the complaint against you made in Voting Cycle 19. In other words, the CoCC made an informal, internal decision 30 hours ago and expected to have time to refine this concept, confirm its implementation & share the decision publicly in due course. But then this discussion blew up here and on Discord about 28 hours ago. And then I went out on my own and promised you an answer regarding this internal decision 24 hours ago. Thus, this chain of events has caused tough-to-handle time pressures & possibly exposed some of the internal mechanics of the CoCC in the public Discourse when it would have been far, far better for the CoCC to not have these time pressures created by me & you, and to instead have the CoCC publicly announce any decision in due course after reasonable refinements and clarity could be added. WHAT I’M GETTING AT HERE: Without being able to offer your perfect clarity right now within the 24-hours, it would be best to cover all bases, allow the CoCC to adhere to it’s Internal Operating Procedures (IOPs), and still have you respond to the CoCC questions by the 25/2 (when the IOPs state the response window closes). Beyond this, I cannot say much more or predict what will happen in the future. Just that the response time window will close on 25/2 as stated by CoCC correspondence from two days ago, 0xWeston: explicitly stated that you needed my responses by 25/2 to proceed. and that you should consider this path still in play, and should follow this timeline for any response to cover all bases. I hope this response meets the deadline to wait that I requested. And I hope you continue to engage with the CoCC by providing the requested response by the 25/2. All the best and Stay Optimistic!
• Code of Conduct Council Communication Thread by 0xWeston - No Role
  Posted on: Feb. 22, 2024, 10:21 p.m.
  Content: Hi @Axel_T Thank you very much for taking the time and answering so thoroughly. I found this extremely informative and helpful. I sincerely appreciate this and it does provide a lot of clarity I was seeking. I would love to connect with the CoCC on a call to further clear up any outstanding concerns / questions or issues. Thanks again, Weston
  Likes: 2 Replies: 0
  Likers: Axel_T, alexsotodigital
  No replies yet.