As I mentioned in my thread https://gov.uniswap.org/t/ignas-delegate-platform/24674?u=ignas, I’m all for initiatives that makes governance more decentralized, neutral, transparent, and resistant to manipulation. This is key to the protocol’s long-term sustainability in DeFi. So, definitely a “yes” from me 
Other delegates such as Seedgov, Jengajojo,… added great suggestions. Looking forward to seeing it applied!
We support this proposal, you can read our rationale in our delegation thread:
Blockworks Advisory is voting FOR this proposal.
We have observed similar proposals in other DAOs and believe this initiative will add value to the community. It establishes a code of ethics for delegates, serving as a guiding principle much like a north star aligns delegates with shared objectives. However, we would like to stress the importance of incorporating some form of binding or enforcement mechanism for these principles in the future. Without such measures, their impact may remain limited. That said, introducing enforceable elements would require significant expansion and clearer definition of the framework.
While these principles are intended to occupy a space between a full constitution and a code of conduct, we question the need for this cautious approach. What’s the point of having a set of ethics that delegates can simply choose to opt into? Such an arrangement feels inherently counterintuitive.
The following reflects the views of L2BEAT’s governance team, composed of @kaereste and @Sinkas, and it’s based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
We unfortunately missed the voting deadline and were unable to cast our vote. Nevertheless, we wanted to comment to still signal our support for putting forward some principles that participants in the DAO are expected to adhere to.
As others have already pointed out, enforcement of such principles might be hard in practice, but in our eyes, it’s more of a social agreement that sets some expectations - and that’s enough.