TLDR

This proposal ratifies a principle-based Code of Conduct for CCMOON DAO Officers and Guardians.

• Prioritizes good-faith actions
• Avoids micromanagement and rigid trading rules
• Encourages officers to avoid using non-public information when trading MOON
• Allows governance to remove officers who personally enrich themselves at the expense of other holders
• Keeps enforcement lightweight and fully governed by DAO vote

Guiding Principles Used to Draft This Code

The Code of Conduct is written with the following principles:

1. Good faith is the primary standard Officers and Guardians should be protected when acting honestly, reasonably, and in the DAO’s best interest, even if outcomes are negative.
2. Avoid over-regulation: The Code should act as guardrails, not a rulebook or HR policy.
3. Prevent clear abuse, not speculation. Restrictions should target misuse of asymmetric information and self-dealing, not normal ecosystem participation.
4. Anything not expressly prohibited is permitted. Flexibility and speed matter more than exhaustive rules.
5. Governance, not bureaucracy, enforces accountability. Enforcement should rely on existing DAO voting and removal mechanisms, not automatic penalties or new committees.

Proposed Code of Conduct

CCMOON DAO Officer and Guardian Code of Conduct

1. Scope and Applicability

This Code of Conduct applies to all DAO Officers and Guardians (Multisignature Key Holders) of the CCMOON DAO.

By accepting or continuing to serve in such a role, each Officer and Guardian agrees to abide by this Code as a condition of service.

2. Core Principle: Good Faith

Officers and Guardians are expected to act in good faith, with the honest belief that their actions are in the best interests of the DAO and its Participants.

Actions taken in good faith do not constitute a violation solely because outcomes were unfavorable, experiments failed, market conditions changed, or decisions were later disagreed with.

Good faith is the primary standard by which conduct is evaluated.

3. Duty to the DAO

Officers and Guardians are expected to act with reasonable care, diligence, and judgment, and to seek to advance the long-term health and credibility of the DAO.

This Code does not require perfection, only honest and reasonable effort.

4. Conflicts of Interest

Officers and Guardians must disclose material conflicts of interest when reasonably known.

Disclosure is required. Recusal is encouraged when appropriate. Participation is not automatically prohibited unless the conflict constitutes clear self-dealing or abuse of position.

Holding MOON, participating in the ecosystem, or maintaining external affiliations does not by itself constitute a violation.

5. Use of Information and Assets

Officers and Guardians may freely hold, trade, and use MOON or other crypto assets.

They are encouraged to avoid using non-public information obtained through their role when making decisions to buy, sell, or otherwise trade MOON.

If an Officer or Guardian uses non-public information to personally enrich themselves at the expense of other DAO participants, including through trading activity, such conduct constitutes a breach of trust and may result in removal from office through DAO governance vote.

There are no automatic penalties or trading bans under this provision. Enforcement occurs solely through existing constitutional governance processes.

6. Authority, Resources, and Decision-Making

Officers and Guardians may act informally, efficiently, and experimentally when acting within delegated authority, in good faith, and with reasonable judgment.

Rigid pre-approval is not required for all operational actions. Material actions should be disclosed after the fact when reasonably practicable.

7. Transparency

Officers and Guardians are expected to provide basic after-the-fact transparency for material matters, including significant treasury movements, governance-impacting decisions, and security or operational incidents.

No fixed reporting cadence or format is required.

8. Conduct, Disagreement, and Expression

Disagreement, dissent, debate, and minority viewpoints are explicitly permitted.

This Code does not regulate tone or expression unless conduct materially harms DAO operations, governance integrity, or community trust.

9. Reliance on Norms and Precedent

Reasonable reliance on established community norms, past practice, informal consensus, and good-faith interpretations of governance is acceptable, even where no explicit rule existed at the time.

10. Enforcement and Interpretation

This Code is a principle-based governance standard.

There are no automatic penalties, no new enforcement bodies, and no retroactive application. Enforcement occurs only through existing constitutional governance and removal processes.

Anything not expressly prohibited is permitted.

11. Effectiveness

This Code becomes effective upon ratification and applies immediately to all current and future Officers and Guardians.

Rationale: Why Each Section Was Written This Way

Scope
The Code applies only where authority is concentrated. Officers and Guardians hold elevated permissions and discretion.

Good Faith Standard
DAOs require experimentation. Punishing honest mistakes discourages participation and slows progress.

Duty to the DAO
Establishes expectations without importing corporate fiduciary or legal complexity.

Conflicts of Interest
Disclosure-first avoids excluding qualified contributors while still preventing clear abuse.

Use of Non-Public Information
Rather than rigid trading restrictions, the DAO adopted a principle-based standard focused on trust and fairness. Officers are encouraged to avoid trading based on non-public information, while governance retains the authority to remove officers who clearly enrich themselves at the expense of other holders.

Decision-Making Flexibility
Operational speed matters more than rigid process.

Transparency
After-the-fact disclosure balances accountability with efficiency.

Disagreement Protection
Healthy governance requires dissent. The Code cannot be weaponized against unpopular views.

Reliance on Norms
DAOs operate on precedent as much as text. This protects reasonable behavior.

Enforcement Model
Governance decides consequences, not automated rules or mechanical thresholds.