I have been here for just over 100 days and want us to succeed as a community in this endeavor that we call ENS. These are my views that I hope you can take to heart:
The community will speak and we should honor the results of the vote on [EP6.1][Social]. I acknowledge that there are hurt feelings and the vote does not invalidate them, nor dismiss members’ concerns.
Let’s come together and move forward and focus on ENS and its future. In that vein, without doing anything that would be repugnant to our decentralized governance, an unwritten Code of Conduct should be followed that squarely addresses the issue, which has so divided us, that any expression of one’s sincerely held personal beliefs be done in a way that would not cast ENS in a poor light, whether intended or not, or adversely impact ENS’s mission and goal of inclusiveness. To be fair to our community, if you are a recognized representative of ENS, because you hold a leadership position or marketing role, please exercise good judgment and make it clear that any personal views on sensitive issues that you express are your own and in no way reflect those of the ENS community.
I agree 100% with your sentiment berrios… I only worry about the above statement being a slippery-slope, as then the person is not free to express themselves and their beliefs. Whether part of TNL, or an ENS Steward/Delegator/Mod, it is not the place of the DAO to dictate where, when, or how individuals can express themselves (my opinon).
Also, forgive my ignorance if this is clear, but where can I find the mission of ENS DAO?
All I have found searching is the Governance section of the docs here: Welcome to ENS DAO - ENS Documentation
I wish to be clear, I am an advocate for inclusion and diversity - but there needs to be a balanced approach and am unsure whether the DAOs mission & values have been codified.
You have ignored or did not apprehend the introductory clause of this sentence that we do not do anything to undermine decentralization and then goes on to say “an unwritten Code of Conduct”, which implies what follows is my suggestion–not a “rule” or dictate (i.e., no abridgement on freedom of speech, which I would be against).
Lastly, I end making the following plea:
Nowhere in my unofficial statement, of my free speech views, do I create a slippery slope by making this statement. I’m asking for self-governance of one’s expressions in way that doesn’t hurt ENS–not to stop making such expressions.