top of page
PayPal ButtonPayPal Button
PayPal ButtonPayPal Button
PayPal ButtonPayPal Button
PayPal ButtonPayPal Button
  • Writer's pictureKyle

Q&A:This AIP Aims To Make An Ombud Position At The ApeCoin DAO That Will Handle Various Ape Disputes

Updated: Oct 2, 2023

The ApeCoin DAO is voting on an Ape Improvement Proposal this week that aims to create an Ombud position at the DAO. This Ombud would be tasked with handling disputes within the $Ape community, formal complaints against DAO elected officials, and adjudicating possible bans from the DAO.


AIP-308 titled “Establish an Ombud for the DAO,” is a process proposal written by ApeCoin DAO Contributor ApeForLife.


“The proposal seeks to establish the position of Ombud of the DAO,” ApeForLife wrote. “The Ombud will carry out spot checks several times a week on DAO posts and DAO related posts of officials of the DAO and investigate and adjudicate upon complaints of members of the DAO against elected officials of the DAO. Also to create a procedure for the Ombud to adjudicate and ban members of the DAO permanently where such members had continuously violated the DAO rules.”


For those who are unfamiliar with an Ombud, it is defined as “someone who helps resolve conflicts and concerns,” according to Baylor University.


The ApeCoin Ombud would oversee infractions and digressions by elected DAO officials and act as an adjudicator when ApeCoin DAO Contributors fail to abide by community rules.


If AIP-308 is passed, ApeForLife, the author of this proposal, will serve as the DAO's first Ombud for 24 months and receive a monthly payment of $5,000 USD in $Ape.


To find out more about AIP-308 and how the ApeForLife would handle conflicts between DAO members, the Bored Ape Gazette reached out to them for an interview. Check it out below:


1. Can you tell me what your AIP is all about in a sentence or two?


The AIP seeks to establish an Ombud for the Apecoin DAO to resolve disputes internally and it provides procedures to adjudicate on matters relating to complaints regarding officials of the DAO and members of the DAO that continuously violate DAO rules.


2. What inspired you to write this AIP?


“There has recently been several incidents that made me realize that an Ombud was required. 1 The dispute that ensued after an AIP was launched by GWG to change the functions of the APE assembly. 2 An AIP that was launched in the DAO to have a Facilitator removed. 3 Statements made with regards to the GWG budget to the effect that GWG might be encroaching on the areas of other Working Groups of the DAO. 4 General comments on the Forum complaining about the conduct of other members of the DAO.”


3. Why does the DAO need an Ombud?


“An Ombud can intervene when a dispute arises to act as an impartial go between to attempt to resolve a dispute quickly. The DAO currently has no dispute resolution mechanism and as such any dispute that arises often quickly escalates in the forum as members of the DAO express their frustrations, while rallying support from other DAO members. Without dispute resolution mechanisms the dispute can remain for an extended period with accusations escalating. The instances listed above clearly indicated the need for an ombud to resolve disputes. As the DAO grows with different Working Groups and different community views these disputes are likely to increase in future.”


4. Why are you the right person to be the Ombud?


“I am an attorney with more than 20 years of experience, which includes extensive experience in litigation and conducting pre-trial conferences directed at bringing matters to settlement. I also have experience as a Director, Executor, Trustee and Chairman of a Body Corporate. I am a level 3 'Regular' member of the DAO and I have gained knowledge as to the specific challenges that the DAO faces. I believe that this unique combination and knowledge will make me ideally suited for assisting the DAO with resolving disputes as Ombud or adjudicating on disputes where required by this AIP or by agreement with different groups of the DAO.”


5. In your AIP you say that people who are ‘continuously discourteous’ may be permanently banned. What does ‘continuously discourteous’ mean? what is discourteous behavior? What’s the line?


"The guideline in this regard corresponds with the definition of 'Appropriate' as defined in the AIP as statements should be 'courteous and without sarcasm, negative innuendo or personal insult'. 'Discurteous' will thus in terms of this definition amount to defamation or slander in most countries, but can also include sarcastic statements that might or might not amount to slander or defamation. This could include a statement like - 'You clearly aren't Einstein's sister, perhaps you should go back to school' for example - i.e. effectively insulting the person's intelligence and education."


6. What should people know about your AIP before they vote?


"The AIP will bring much needed dispute resolution and adjudication on disputes that is required for the DAO to function. The current tendency of launching AIPs when conflicts arises to often counter or discredit the other party involved in the conflict is clearly not appropriate and in most cases will rather increase the conflict."


7. What does success look like for your AIP?


"If the AIP passes there would immediately be an improvement in dealing with complaints and an Ombud will be available to be used in mediating or arbitrating DAO disputes and it would thus already be a success on passing in that regard."


8. Where do you see the Ombud position a year from now?


“The functions of the Ombud can be expanded and procedures can be put in place between the Ape Assembly and Working Groups to resolve disputes through the Ombud. This could also be extended to members of the DAO that wish to complain about certain actions taken by the Working Groups or other DAO structures. This will be set up after further consultation takes place with the relevant groups.”


9. Do you have anything else you’d like to add or say?


“I think I can perhaps just add that I am all for freedom of speech and fiery debate about issues. However when something degrades to personal insults etc it can amount to defamation or slander and this type of conduct should be addressed. The ombud will in fact also serve as an independent check that Facilitators are also not warning members of the DAO unnecessarily. As such members of the DAO are also thus protected from arbitrary bans.”


The window to vote on AIP-308 is currently open and ApeCoin DAO Contributors have until next Wednesday, October 4th, to cast their coins.


$Apes can read ApeForLife’s full proposal here: https://forum.apecoin.com/t/aip-308-establish-an-ombud-for-the-dao/16996


The Bored Ape Gazette will continue to follow AIP-308 and will let you know how the community votes on this proposal later this week. Stay tuned for updates!

26 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page