[RFC] Delegate Code of Conduct

Delegate Code of Conduct

Hello, Honn from the Uniswap Foundation here. Today we are proposing the creation of a Delegate Code of Conduct as we look to further mature Uniswap governance and add additional structure to our community standards.

We are fielding feedback on this Code of Conduct over the next 10 days, until Sunday April 9th, and will incorporate strongly-held and useful feedback into the document from the community. If there is no strong dissent from the community, we plan to add in an option to represent a Delegate’s agreement to abide by the Code of Conduct in the new Agora Delegate tool, launching soon.

  • The Delegate Code of Conduct will be opt-in. Delegates may let the community know that they agree to abide by the conditions of the Code of Conduct in the Forum and/or in the new Agora Delegate tool.
  • The Delegate Code of Conduct will not cover all possible scenarios and edge cases. We ask that delegates please act in accordance with the spirit of the Code and refrain from exploiting loopholes that may exist.
  • The rules of engagement for the Forum are in alignment with but separate from this Code of Conduct and can be found here.

Good Faith and Best Interest

  • Delegates should act with honesty, integrity, and transparency, at all times.
  • Delegates should operate and vote in accordance with what they believe is in the best interest of the Uniswap Protocol.

Due Care and Attention

  • Delegates should conduct a professional and unbiased review of each proposal prior to voting.
  • Delegates are advised to abstain from voting when unable to conduct the necessary diligence to understand the proposals.
  • Delegates are encouraged to create proposals that they believe will benefit the Uniswap Protocol.

Civility and Professionalism

  • Delegates should be committed to fostering a safe, welcoming, and harassment-free environment for all.
  • Delegates should provide constructive feedback supported by high quality and well researched arguments. Delegates must not personally attack the opinions or personal merits of proposal authors or any other party engaging in governance activity. Delegates must not make unsubstantiated claims to advocate for or against any proposal or proposal author.
  • Delegates should be respectful of differing viewpoints.
  • Examples of unacceptable behavior include (but are not limited to): Public or private harassment; publishing others’ private information, such as physical or email address, full name, or other identifiable information, without their explicit permission; use of sexualized language or imagery, and sexual attention or advances of any kind; insulting or derogatory comments; other conduct which would reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting

Communication, Availability and Responsiveness

  • Delegates are expected to transparently and clearly communicate their rationale behind votes and discussions to the Uniswap community in an accessible manner.
  • Delegates should be accessible (within reason) to the community to answer questions, respond to comments, and discuss issues regarding proposals.
  • Delegates should communicate to the community when they plan to stop being an active delegate in order to give delegators an opportunity to redelegate and prevent idleness of votes.

Conflicts of Interest

  • Delegates should avoid conflicts of interest where possible and disclose conflicts of interests where they exist. We even recommend disclosing potential conflicts of interest as they may relate to your activities as a delegate. A conflict of interest may arise when a delegate derives personal benefit from their actions (i.e. voting in a certain manner) as a Delegate.



Love this! Something I have been thinking about recently: Should delegates represent the DAO or the protocol foremost and are there scenarios where these entities diverge?

For example, turning on the fee switch could hurt the protocol but benefit the DAO.

Great write-up Honn. Do I understand correctly that this is meant to foster overall honesty and professionalism when it comes to governance participation and discussing the Uniswap protocol? Or is this more for the largest delegates?

Kydo from Stanford Blockchain here.

This is a great proposal, @honn24x. I think this is a great first step to giving more structure to the governance forum.

I would not necessarily agree with this @MattOnChain . Without a sustainable model of value accrual, Uniswap Protocol will not be able to sustain itself. Therefore, the fee switch discussion is not a binary one where the protocol would be hurt and the DAO benefit and vice versa.


Great question, Matt. At the end of the day, the Uniswap DAO exists to govern the Uniswap Protocol, and as such should have its best interests at heart. For instance, a delegate might consider the impact of a proposal’s long-term growth and sustainability and prioritize those over short-term considerations. Of course, individual delegates may differ in their opinion on whether a proposal is in the best interest of the protocol. Those disagreements may be debated in the forum.

1 Like

Hi Mark, yes, regardless of the delegation size, the intent would be for all delegates to act in the spirit of the Delegate Code of Conduct.

Thank you so much! Hope you have a great weekend