Just a heads up - our dYdX Forum Code of Conduct has been officially live for a week now! You can check it out here: dYdX Code of Conduct.
I want to extend a huge thank you to everyone who contributed their ideas, suggestions, and feedback. This was a collaborative effort and it wouldn’t have been possible without your valuable input.
A special shoutout to @lordcrisv, @tane, @mgg, @luisqa, @gaoa97, and @leonoorscryptoman for your active involvement in this initiative. Your contributions have been instrumental in shaping this important document.
Remember, as I mentioned in my initial post, this Code of Conduct is a living document. It will be regularly updated to reflect the trends and needs of our community. We’re planning more initiatives like this, so stay tuned!
Your ongoing feedback is crucial for us. Please feel free to share your thoughts on the recent updates and changes. We’re keen to know how you feel and what you think.
Here’s the link to our feedback form: Feedback Form
Thank you @Stan for the update and indeed shoutout to community members contributing.
Thank you, @Stan and the dYdX Ops DAO team, for launching the dYdX Forum Code of Conduct! A Big shoutout to you and others for their contributions. We’re excited to share this with our Portuguese-speaking community. Let’s keep the collaboration going!
You have edited my posts, possibly to ensure compliance with the code of conduct. Since important evidence was removed, I believe it would be preferable to delete the topic altogether rather than have it exist in such a form. It is unnecessary to waste time on trivialities; the community members have already drawn their conclusions from that story and it is time to turn the page.
Thanks @charles and @lordcrisv for the kind words! It’s teamwork that brings projects like the CoC to life!
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. The edit made to your post was in line with our recently implemented Code of Conduct, particularly concerning privacy protection and avoiding personal attacks. It’s crucial for us to maintain a respectful and safe environment for all community members.
I understand your concerns about the edited content. However, the essence of your post remains intact, allowing the community to understand the context and draw their own conclusions. Our goal is not to stifle discussion but to ensure it’s conducted in a manner that aligns with our community values, especially regarding respectful and constructive communication.
The decision not to remove the post entirely is based on our commitment to open dialogue and transparency, as long as it’s within the boundaries of our Code of Conduct. We believe in providing a platform for all voices to be heard, as long as they adhere to the community standards we’ve set.
We value your participation in our community and encourage you to continue sharing your perspectives, keeping in mind the guidelines we’ve collectively agreed upon.
Stan, thank you for your response.
However, I must disagree with your characterizations. We are a community of a fully decentralized web3 protocol. Users should have the right to control the content they create. This post was written long before your arrival and the Code of Conduct. I strongly object to the amendments you made. In particular, you removed a screenshot that indicated the ownership of the domain cryptohondos.com. Also the information that Ale**os was one of the signers of the multisig transaction was deleted. The post had already been modified by Valentin, with which changes I agreed. Therefore, I propose two possible solutions to this situation:
- The topic is completely deleted.
- The topic remains, but at the beginning of the first post it will be boldly written: “This post has been edited by moderator Stan, and the author of the original post, RealVovochka, does not agree with these edits and does not recognize this post as an authentic expression of his thoughts.”
Great job on this! The community appreciates the time and effort spent on a CoC it’s much needed. I’m requesting some clarification and have some minor feedback.
I suggest a revision of “Common Violations” #5 minor error there.
I recently observed that a portion of my post was removed due to an alleged violation of the Code of Conduct (CoC). I am trying to seek clarification on the specific violation to better understand and adhere to the community guidelines.
I appreciate the effort put into maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment. However, I did not receive any notice regarding the violation, and I am curious if this incident should be considered as a warning.
I want to emphasize my intention is not to create any issues but rather to ensure there is consistency and transparency in the moderation process. I value the community and its guidelines, and your assistance in clarifying this matter is greatly appreciated.