diff --git a/docs/dao/code_of_conduct.md b/docs/dao/code_of_conduct.md index e1dd4ad..1cd6318 100644 --- a/docs/dao/code_of_conduct.md +++ b/docs/dao/code_of_conduct.md @@ -23,11 +23,11 @@ This section provides a brief overview of the expectation and guidelines for DAO 3. Follow Telegram/Discord Chat Rules: Always follow both the private and public rules of behavior outlined below. -4. Adhere to the Code of Conduct: Follow the Code of Conduct and consistently demonstrate respectful and inclusive behavior. +4. Adhere to the Code of Conduct: Follow the Code of Conduct and consistently demonstrate respectful and inclusive behavior. Members are expected to uphold the principles outlined in the [JAM Implementers DAO Constitution](./constitution.md) and the [Polkadot DAO Constitution](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/governance-behavioral-track-suggestion-mechanism/10106/15). ### Don'ts: -1. Do Not Violate the Code of Conduct: Avoid any behavior that goes against the program's Code of Conduct, including disrespectful or discriminatory actions. +1. Do Not Violate the Code of Conduct: Avoid any behavior that goes against the program's Code of Conduct, including disrespectful or discriminatory actions. This includes actions that contradict the principles of the [JAM Implementers DAO Constitution](./constitution.md) and the [Polkadot DAO Constitution](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/governance-behavioral-track-suggestion-mechanism/10106/15). 2. Do Not Spread Misinformation: Ensure all information shared about the DAO is accurate. @@ -35,6 +35,26 @@ This section provides a brief overview of the expectation and guidelines for DAO 4. Do Not Engage in Conflicts of Interest: Maintain transparency in all actions and avoid activities that could present a conflict of interest. +## Appropriate Engagement with JAM Implementers DAO Members + +### Guidelines for Proposers + +When engaging with JAM DAO members regarding your proposals, please observe the following guidelines: + +1. **Respect Professional Boundaries**: JAM Implementers DAO members provide general observations about ecosystem norms and governance standards. Please do not request specific proposal text, detailed design advice, or personalized consulting from JAM Implementers DAO members. + +2. **Avoid Conflict of Interest Situations**: Requesting JAM Implementers DAO members to help design your proposal creates potential conflicts of interest. If a JAM Implementers DAO member provides detailed consulting on your proposal, both they and potentially the entire JAM Implementers DAO may need to recuse from voting on it, undermining their governance duties. + +3. **Respect Contribution Boundaries**: While some JAM Implementers DAO members may receive retroactive compensation through Decentralized Voices (DV) such as [DV Cohort 4](https://medium.com/web3foundation/decentralized-voices-cohort-4-delegates-announced-a5a9c64927fd) that is split amongst all members, a proportion of this funding may need to be reinvested in the JAM Implementers DAO to sustain operations, pay for assistance, community management, and event coordination to allow members electing to vote with delegated voting power to focus on governance. Many members contribute their time and knowledge voluntarily. Members may not have professional liability protection for providing detailed consulting advice. Casual requests for detailed proposal design place members in a difficult position regarding their role boundaries and potential conflicts of interest. + +4. **Focus on Factual Questions**: When communicating with JAM Implementers DAO members, focus on factual questions about governance processes rather than requesting specific advice on how to design your proposal. + +5. **Seek Appropriate Channels for Detailed Help**: If you need detailed proposal design assistance, consider engaging professional consultants through proper channels with clear terms, rather than making informal requests to voting members. + +6. **Consult Governance Resources**: For guidance on governance best practices and accountability standards, refer to resources like the [OpenGov.Watch](https://www.opengov.watch), which provides valuable insights on transparent and effective governance processes. + +Following these guidelines ensures transparent governance processes and maintains appropriate professional boundaries between proposers and voting entities. + ## Private+Public Telegram/Discord/Matrix Chat Rules Members have a private Telegram/Discord group for communication. All members must read and adhere to the following rules to keep the group friendly, welcoming, professional, and on-topic. The rules are few, simple, and are generally recognizable as common decency: @@ -49,7 +69,7 @@ Members have a private Telegram/Discord group for communication. All members mu 5. No (concern-)trolling or otherwise incendiary and/or negative comments and narratives. Keep it constructive and positive. -6. No market, price, or “investor” talk. Members can discuss ICOs, investors, or related topics, as long as the goal isn’t to sponsor investment schemes. +6. No market, price, or "investor" talk. Members can discuss ICOs, investors, or related topics, as long as the goal isn't to sponsor investment schemes. 7. No constant ranting/complaining. Members may express themselves and vent their frustrations about a topic. However, the frequency of ranting/complaining should not annoy members. @@ -57,10 +77,104 @@ Members have a private Telegram/Discord group for communication. All members mu All participants are expected to uphold the above rules in both public and private channels. Moderators for public channels will be selected from the DAO membership. Moderators may ban participants who engage in behavior that violates these rules after sufficient warning is provided. -At the moderators’ discretion, a lesser action (such as warning the individual in question) may be taken. Participants, however, should not count on the good grace of the moderators. In particular, where moderators deem it likely that a single individual is using multiple chat monikers to break the CoC repeatedly, bans without warning may be given. +At the moderators' discretion, a lesser action (such as warning the individual in question) may be taken. Participants, however, should not count on the good grace of the moderators. In particular, where moderators deem it likely that a single individual is using multiple chat monikers to break the CoC repeatedly, bans without warning may be given. If members believe someone in the channel is breaking these rules, members may propose a vote for their removal with proof of offense. No member can be removed without members. +## Moderation + +The JAM Implementers DAO will implement this code of conduct. If you encounter a problem, please contact the moderators. We will respect confidentiality with regard to the reporter of any incident. + +## Procurement Ethics and Fairness + +As a participant in JAM Implementers DAO procurement processes, whether as an evaluator, proposer, or stakeholder, you are expected to uphold the following ethical standards: + +### Evaluators and JAM Implementers DAO Members: + +1. **Impartiality and Objectivity**: + - Do evaluate all proposals based solely on the published evaluation criteria + - Do maintain consistent standards across all evaluations + - Do recuse yourself from evaluations where you cannot be objective + +2. **Conflict of Interest Management**: + - Do proactively disclose any potential conflicts of interest before participating in evaluations + - Do abstain from voting on proposals where you have a direct or indirect interest + - Do not provide preferential information to any potential proposers + - Do maintain appropriate professional boundaries with proposers during evaluation periods + +3. **Confidentiality and Information Management**: + - Protect sensitive information shared in proposals + - Do not share one proposer's information with other proposers + - Maintain confidentiality of deliberations until official decisions are published + - Document all evaluation decisions with clear rationales + +### Proposers and Suppliers: + +1. **Honest Representation**: + - Do provide accurate information about your capabilities, experience, and resources + - Do disclose any limitations that might affect your ability to deliver + - Do not make claims that cannot be substantiated + +2. **Fair Competition**: + - Do not collude with other proposers to manipulate the procurement process + - Do not attempt to obtain confidential information about other proposals + - Do compete on the merits of your proposal rather than through undermining others + +3. **Ethical Engagement**: + - Do not offer gifts, favors, or other inducements to evaluators + - Do respect the established procurement process and timelines + - Do accept feedback constructively and address concerns professionally + - Do report any unethical behavior observed during the procurement process + +### All Participants: + +1. **Transparency**: + - Decision-making processes and justifications should be documented + - Clear feedback should be provided on evaluation decisions + - Evaluation criteria and weightings should be publicly available **before** proposal submission + - Evaluation results should be published with appropriate detail + +2. **Accountability**: + - Accountability should be taken for your role in the procurement process + - Justify decisions when questioned + - Accept appropriate consequences for non-conformance of these standards + - Report suspected non-conformance through appropriate channels + +3. **Continuous Improvement**: + - Regular reviews of procurement processes should be conducted with high participation + - Improvements based on experience should be suggested + - Best practices that enhance fairness and effectiveness should be shared + - Mistakes should be documented and learned from and corrective measures implemented + +### Evaluation Methodology Guidelines + +When implementing the evaluation methodologies outlined in the JAM Implementers DAO Constitution, participants shall adhere to the following guidelines: + +1. **Matrix Comparison Implementation**: + - Individual evaluations should be completed **before** group discussions to prevent groupthink + - Specific justifications should be documented for each score assigned + - Consistent scoring scales should be used across all evaluations (e.g. 1-10) + - Evaluation records should be maintained that clearly show both individual and consensus scores + - Weightings should be determined and published **before** proposal review begins + +2. **Inverse Cost Assessment Implementation**: + - Unusually low bids should be scrutinized for unsustainable work practices + - Mathematical formula used for all price comparisons should be documented + - Minimum quality thresholds should be established **before** price evaluation + - Collusive pricing risk should be identified and mitigated as it has the potential to undermine the process + - Clear explanations of how price scores were calculated should be provided in feedback + +3. **Quality-First Evaluation Implementation**: + - Separation between quality and price evaluations should be strictly maintained + - Minimum quality thresholds (e.g. 35% on each criterion) should be established before price consideration + - Rationale for proceeding with or rejecting the highest-quality proposal should be documented + - Unopened price envelopes should be returned to unsuccessful proposers + - Minimum of three evaluators should participate in quality assessments + +Evaluators must select the appropriate methodology based on proposal complexity, value, and strategic importance to the JAM, Polkadot, and Kusama ecosystems. The selection of methodology must be documented and justified as part of the procurement record. + +Non-conformance with these procurement ethics standards may result in exclusion from current or future procurement processes, removal from evaluation roles, or other appropriate consequences as determined by the JAM Implementers DAO governance process. + ## Disclaimer on the Mutability of the Rules Governance is an emergent and evolving field, and we envision it as a space for experimentation and rapid iteration. As such, the rules outlined above are subject to change without prior notice. The most current version of the rules can always be found in our GitHub repository with next link `https://github.com/JamBrains/jam-docs/blob/main/docs/dao/code_of_conduct.md`. diff --git a/docs/dao/constitution.md b/docs/dao/constitution.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e399cba --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/dao/constitution.md @@ -0,0 +1,646 @@ +# JAM IMPLEMENTERS DAO CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS + +## PREAMBLE + +We, the members of the JAM Implementers DAO, in order to uphold the principles of inclusivity, equality, open participation, and decentralization, to secure the resilience of the Polkadot ecosystem through multiple client implementations of the JAM protocol, and to protect the rights and interests of all participants, do establish these Constitutional Safeguards as binding principles for the governance and operation of the JAM Implementers DAO for the Polkadot ecosystem. + +These Safeguards shall serve to detect, recognize, and constrain harmful behaviors before they escalate, and shall be implemented through blockchain-native mechanisms to ensure adherence to constitutional values rather than political discretion, ensuring that the JAM Implementers DAO honors its declared service profile regardless of the desires, wealth, or power of any economic actors. + +## TABLE OF CONTENTS + +- [ARTICLE I: FOUNDATIONAL VALUES](#article-i-foundational-values) + - [Section 1: Core Service Profile Values](#section-1-core-service-profile-values) + - [Section 2: Governing Principles](#section-2-governing-principles) +- [ARTICLE II: EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS](#article-ii-early-warning-systems) + - [Section 1: Monitoring Requirements](#section-1-monitoring-requirements) + - [Section 2: Transparency and Reporting](#section-2-transparency-and-reporting) +- [ARTICLE III: GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORKS](#article-iii-governance-frameworks) + - [Section 1: Checks and Balances](#section-1-checks-and-balances) + - [Section 2: On-Chain Mechanisms to Ensure Constitutional Accountability](#section-2-on-chain-mechanisms-to-ensure-constitutional-accountability) + - [Section 3: Economic Incentives](#section-3-economic-incentives) + - [Section 4: Decentralized Oversight to Ensure Constitutional Alignment](#section-4-decentralized-oversight-to-ensure-constitutional-alignment) + - [Section 5: Accountability Mechanisms](#section-5-accountability-mechanisms) + - [Section 6: Treasury Procurement Standards](#section-6-treasury-procurement-standards) +- [ARTICLE IV: MULTI-LAYERED ACCOUNTABILITY](#article-iv-multi-layered-accountability) + - [Section 1: Transparent Systems](#section-1-transparent-systems) + - [Section 2: Expert and Developer Accountability](#section-2-expert-and-developer-accountability) + - [Section 3: Systemic Vulnerability Prevention](#section-3-systemic-vulnerability-prevention) + - [Section 4: Middleware and Integration Oversight](#section-4-middleware-and-integration-oversight) + - [Section 5: User Protection](#section-5-user-protection) +- [ARTICLE V: GOVERNANCE PARALYSIS PREVENTION](#article-v-governance-paralysis-prevention) + - [Section 1: Adaptive Quorum Mechanisms](#section-1-adaptive-quorum-mechanisms) + - [Section 2: Tiered Emergency Response](#section-2-tiered-emergency-response) + - [Section 3: Signer Accountability](#section-3-signer-accountability) + - [Section 4: Backup Governance](#section-4-backup-governance) + - [Section 5: Governance Health Monitoring](#section-5-governance-health-monitoring) + - [Section 6: Cross-Collective Governance](#section-6-cross-collective-governance) + - [Section 7: Blockchain-Native Implementation](#section-7-blockchain-native-implementation) +- [ARTICLE VI: PROHIBITED ACTIONS](#article-vi-prohibited-actions) +- [ARTICLE VII: IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENTS](#article-vii-implementation-and-amendments) + - [Section 1: General Implementation](#section-1-general-implementation) + - [Section 2: Amendment Process](#section-2-amendment-process) + - [Section 3: Continuous Improvement](#section-3-continuous-improvement) +- [ARTICLE VIII: RATIFICATION](#article-viii-ratification) +- [ARTICLE IX: TECHNICAL FELLOWSHIP INTEGRATION](#article-ix-technical-fellowship-integration) + - [Section 1: Technical Fellowship Relationship](#section-1-technical-fellowship-relationship) + - [Section 2: Implementation Standards](#section-2-implementation-standards) + - [Section 3: Client Diversity](#section-3-client-diversity) +- [ARTICLE X: VERSION CONTROL](#article-x-version-control) + - [Section 1: Document Version History](#section-1-document-version-history) + - [Section 2: Amendment Guidelines](#section-2-amendment-guidelines) +- [ARTICLE XI: SUSTAINABLE WORK STANDARDS AND ECOSYSTEM WELLBEING](#article-xi-sustainable-work-standards-and-ecosystem-wellbeing) + - [Section 1: Core Principles](#section-1-core-principles) + - [Section 1A: Individual Autonomy and Freedom](#section-1a-individual-autonomy-and-freedom) + - [Section 2: Humane Work Standards](#section-2-humane-work-standards) + - [Section 3: Monitoring and Response](#section-3-monitoring-and-response) + - [Section 4: Treasury Funding and Endorsement Requirements](#section-4-treasury-funding-and-endorsement-requirements) + - [Section 5: Education and Resources](#section-5-education-and-resources) + - [Section 6: Implementation and Accountability](#section-6-implementation-and-accountability) + +## ARTICLE I: FOUNDATIONAL VALUES + +### Section 1: Core Service Profile Values + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall uphold and protect the following core service profile values as outlined in the JAM Graypaper: + +1. **Resilience**: The JAM protocol implementations and the Polkadot ecosystem shall remain highly resistant to being stopped, corrupted, or censored. +2. **Generality**: The JAM protocol shall support Turing-complete computation capabilities accessible to all participants. +3. **Performance**: Computation shall be performed quickly and at low cost. +4. **Coherency**: Clear causal relationships between different elements of state shall be maintained, allowing applications to be well-composed. +5. **Accessibility**: The JAM protocol shall provide negligible barriers to innovation with easy, fast, cheap, and permissionless participation. + +### Section 2: Governing Principles + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall be governed according to the principles derived from the Polkadot Technical Fellowship Manifesto: + +1. **Enlightened Liberalism**: Respecting individual freedom while promoting collective responsibility, honesty, and tolerance. +2. **Critical Rationalism**: Judging only by actions, not suppositions, associations, or words. +3. **Web3 Values**: Reducing the need for individuals to trust groups by providing tools for direct interaction and empowering individuals through decentralized governance. + +## ARTICLE II: EARLY WARNING SYSTEMS + +### Section 1: Monitoring Requirements + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain robust mechanisms to detect patterns that may threaten its health. These mechanisms shall include: + +1. Monitoring for dehumanizing, scapegoating, or inflammatory rhetoric. +2. Detection of attempts at governance, legal, or judicial system capture. +3. Identification of restrictions on transparent information sharing. +4. Tracking of governance participation patterns that may indicate centralization of power. +5. Identification of barriers to accessibility or performance that could limit participation. +6. Monitoring for threats to system resilience or coherency. +7. Detection of client implementation divergence that could lead to consensus failures. + +### Section 2: Transparency and Reporting + +1. All monitoring data shall be made publicly available through on-chain mechanisms. +2. Regular reports on implementation progress and ecosystem health metrics shall be published. +3. Thresholds for alerts shall be clearly defined and publicly documented. +4. Client implementation compatibility reports shall be regularly published. + +## ARTICLE III: GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORKS + +### Section 1: Checks and Balances + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain the following governance checks and balances: + +1. **OpenGov multi-track proposal system** with different approval thresholds based on proposal sensitivity. +2. **Coordination with the Technical Fellowship** to ensure JAM Improvement Proposals (JIPs) and Polkadot Requests for Comment (RFCs) align with JAM specifications, while respecting that the JAM Implementers DAO and Technical Fellowship are separate entities with distinct governance structures. +3. Transparent on-chain voting records with immutable history. +4. Cross-collective governance mechanisms to prevent siloed decision-making among implementation teams. +5. Support for JAM implementers who successfully deliver JAM protocol clients to be considered for Technical Fellowship membership through established pathways. + +### Section 2: On-Chain Mechanisms to Ensure Constitutional Accountability + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall implement the following mechanisms to ensure constitutional accountability: + +1. Automatic execution of governance rules through code, not political discretion. +2. Transparent, immutable records of all governance actions and instances of non-compliance. +3. Programmatic implementation of proportional responses. +4. Cryptographic proof of governance non-compliance that cannot be denied or reinterpreted. +5. Client implementation verification through automated testing frameworks. + +### Section 3: Economic Incentives + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall align economic incentives with constitutional accountability through: + +1. Automatic incentive adjustments for governance non-compliance through smart contracts. +2. Reward mechanisms for constitutional compliance and protocol implementation contributions. +3. Economic disincentives for actions that threaten implementation quality or interoperability. +4. Transparent accounting of all incentives and disincentives. +5. Funding allocation based on implementation milestones and quality metrics. + +### Section 4: Decentralized Oversight to Ensure Constitutional Alignment + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall ensure decentralized oversight through: + +1. Distributed authority across multiple governance bodies and implementation teams. +2. Cryptographic verification of governance actions. +3. Permissionless participation in oversight mechanisms. +4. Elimination of single points of failure in governance systems. +5. Immutable records of all governance actions. +6. Multi-signature requirements for critical decisions. + +### Section 5: Accountability Mechanisms + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall implement accountability mechanisms including: + +1. Clear, executable outcomes for non-compliance that don't require consensus to implement. +2. Graduated measures proportional to non-compliance severity. +3. Transparent reporting of all instances of non-compliance and responses. +4. Mandatory conflict of interest disclosures for all governance participants since hidden conflicts of interest directly undermine governance integrity and can lead to decisions that benefit individuals at the expense of the ecosystem with disincentives for non-disclosure that may include: + a. Scaling of voting power reduction proportional to conflict of interest severity. + b. Removal of voting rights on direct conflicts of interest matters. + c. Temporary or permanent suspension of governance participation for serious undisclosed conflicts of interest. + d. Economic disincentives through compensation token slashing for non-disclosed conflicts of interest. +5. Implementation team accountability for client performance and security. +6. Mechanisms for remediation and restoration following instances of non-compliance or failures. +7. Demonstrate understanding of these constitutional requirements +8. Establish transparent reporting on actual hours worked compared to estimates, activation of emergency protocols, and team wellbeing metrics throughout the project lifecycle +9. Accept that non-compliance with these standards constitutes grounds for funding revocation, withdrawal of endorsement, and ineligibility for future treasury support + +### Section 6: Treasury Procurement Standards + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall implement the following procurement standards for all treasury funding decisions: + +1. **Standardized Evaluation Criteria**: + a. All treasury funding requests shall be evaluated using weighted criteria including: + i. Technical merit and innovation (alignment with JAM protocol requirements) + ii. Ecosystem alignment (contribution to Polkadot ecosystem goals) + iii. Value for money (cost-effectiveness relative to expected benefits) + iv. Implementation capability (team experience and capacity) + v. Sustainability (long-term viability and maintenance plan) + b. Criteria weightings shall be published in advance to ensure transparency + c. Evaluation scores and justifications shall be documented and made publicly available + +2. **Inclusive Procurement Practices**: + a. Scaled requirements proportional to funding size (using the 500-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA500) of DOT/USD and KSM/USD to establish stable USD equivalent values, as calculated and published by [CoinGecko](https://www.coingecko.com) or an alternative reputable data provider designated by the JAM Implementers DAO): + i. **Minimal Documentation and Streamlined Evaluation** (proposals under $20,000 USD equivalent): + - Polkadot: Small Tipper (≤250 DOT), Big Tipper (≤1,000 DOT) + - Kusama: Small Tipper (≤8.25 KSM), Big Tipper (≤33.33 KSM) + - Features: Simplified application forms, expedited review process, lower approval thresholds + + ii. **Moderate Documentation with Focused Technical Evaluation** (proposals between $20,000 and $100,000 USD equivalent): + - Polkadot: Small Spender (≤10,000 DOT) + - Kusama: Small Spender (≤333.33 KSM), Medium Spender (≤3,333.33 KSM) + - Features: Standard technical documentation, focused evaluation on core deliverables, moderate approval thresholds + + iii. **Comprehensive Documentation with Rigorous Evaluation** (proposals above $100,000 USD equivalent): + - Polkadot: Medium Spender (≤100,000 DOT), Big Spender (≤1,000,000 DOT), Treasurer (≤10,000,000 DOT) + - Kusama: Big Spender (≤33,333.33 KSM), Treasurer (≤333,333.33 KSM) + - Features: Detailed technical specifications, milestone-based delivery plans, comprehensive risk assessments, higher approval thresholds, enhanced reporting requirements + b. Referral to independent resources such as [OpenGov.Watch](https://opengov.watch) for proposal guidance and standards + c. Mentorship connections between experienced and emerging teams + d. Diversity and inclusion considerations: + i. Recognition of proposals from underrepresented geographic regions in the ecosystem + ii. Acknowledgment of proposals from teams with diverse composition across dimensions including but not limited to technical background, experience level, and demographic factors + iii. Consideration of social impact enterprises that combine technical merit with positive community outcomes + iv. Value placed on proposals that expand ecosystem participation to new contributor groups + +3. **Conflict of Interest Management**: + a. Mandatory disclosure of any potential conflicts **before** evaluation begins + b. Recusal requirements for members with direct or indirect conflicts of interest + c. Public documentation of all recusals due to conflicts of interest and their justifications + d. Prohibition on members providing detailed consulting on proposals they will evaluate + +4. **Probity and Fairness**: + a. Independent evaluation by multiple JAM Implementers DAO members **before** collective discussion + b. Structured deliberation using standardized templates that are publicly available + c. Evaluation decisions that are transparent and documented with clear justifications + d. Procurement processes should be regularly reviewed for continuous improvement + e. Prohibition on post-decision negotiations that materially alter approved proposals + +5. **Supplier Obligations**: + a. Adherence to the JAM Implementers DAO Code of Conduct + b. Compliance with sustainable work standards as outlined in Article XI + c. Disclosure of any findings of dishonest, unfair, unconscionable, corrupt, or illegal conduct + d. Commitment to transparent reporting throughout the project lifecycle + +6. **Evaluation Methodologies**: + a. **Matrix Comparison**: Standard proposals shall be evaluated using a matrix comparison methodology where evaluators shall independently score each criterion **before** group discussion with documented justifications for each score + b. **Inverse Cost Assessment**: + i. **Multiple proposers**: Price-sensitive proposals shall be evaluated using an inverse cost assessment methodology where a proportional scoring system that divides the lowest tendered price by each proposal price and multiplies by the maximum score, with safeguards against low-ball pricing + ii. **Single proposer**: Upon receipt of only one proposal, the JAM Implementers DAO shall evaluate whether the proposed price represents fair value by comparing it to: + - Historical costs for similar work + - Cost estimates from independent sources + - Market benchmarks where available + - Alignment of the proposal with treasury capacity and priorities + - Funding history of the project, with particular scrutiny for proposals from teams that have received substantial prior treasury funding but have pivoted or not delivered on previous commitments, as such projects should typically seek venture capital funding rather than continued treasury support + c. **Quality-First Evaluation**: Complex or high-value proposals shall be evaluated using a two-envelope system where non-price criteria are evaluated **first** with only the highest-rated proposal's price envelope opened for negotiation + d. The JAM Implementers DAO shall select the most appropriate methodology based on the proposal type, complexity, and value + +7. **Grounds for Exclusion**: + a. The JAM Implementers DAO may exclude suppliers or proposers from consideration where there is reasonable belief that the supplier, their directors, or managers have engaged in corrupt conduct, failed to perform under prior contracts, made false declarations, or been convicted of serious offenses. + b. For OpenGov proposals with a single proposer, these exclusion criteria shall still apply. In such cases, the JAM Implementers DAO may recommend: + i. Rejection of the proposal with documented justification + ii. Requesting modifications to the proposal to address concerns + iii. Seeking alternative proposers for the same work if the need remains valid + c. Proposers who engage in governance spam, including but not limited to repeatedly submitting non-conformant proposals that waste procurement evaluation resources, may be subject to temporary or permanent exclusion from consideration after: + i. Receiving formal notification of non-conformance + ii. Being provided reasonable opportunity to correct their approach + iii. Continuing the pattern of non-conformant submissions + d. All exclusion decisions must be documented with clear justification and evidence supporting the decision. + +## ARTICLE IV: MULTI-LAYERED ACCOUNTABILITY + +### Section 1: Transparent Systems + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain transparent systems that: + +1. Prevent concealment of the true cause of hacks or failures. +2. Maintain immutable, publicly accessible records of all critical operations. +3. Require public disclosure of post-mortems for all security incidents. +4. Implement real-time monitoring of critical infrastructure components. +5. Ensure client implementation code is open-source and auditable. + +### Section 2: Expert and Developer Accountability + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall ensure expert and developer accountability through: + +1. Prohibition of disclaiming accountability for preventable failures. +2. Clear attribution of code authorship and review accountability. +3. Accountability frameworks to ensure appropriate security practices. +4. Prohibition of "not financial/technical advice" disclaimers to evade accountability. +5. Mandatory code review processes for all client implementations. +6. Required security certifications for critical infrastructure components. +7. Ongoing accountability for maintenance of deployed systems. + +### Section 3: Systemic Vulnerability Prevention + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall prevent systemic vulnerabilities through: + +1. Mandatory security reviews by multiple independent parties for each client implementation. +2. Prohibition of single points of failure in critical systems. +3. Required fail-safe mechanisms to prevent catastrophic outcomes. +4. Mandatory circuit breakers for critical operations. +5. Formal verification requirements for critical code. +6. Regular security audits of all client implementations. +7. Cross-implementation testing to ensure protocol compatibility. + +### Section 4: Middleware and Integration Oversight + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall ensure middleware and integration security through: + +1. Clear accountability assignment for integration security. +2. Standardized security protocols for cross-chain interactions. +3. Mandatory audits of bridges, oracles, and middleware. +4. Interoperability testing between different client implementations. +5. Graduated testing requirements based on potential impact. + +### Section 5: User Protection + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall protect users through: + +1. Required confirmation steps proportional to risk. +2. Clear warnings for potentially destructive actions. +3. Simulation capabilities to preview transaction outcomes. +4. Recovery mechanisms for certain classes of user errors. +5. Educational resources about safe usage of JAM protocol implementations. + +## ARTICLE V: GOVERNANCE PARALYSIS PREVENTION + +### Section 1: Adaptive Quorum Mechanisms + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall implement adaptive quorum mechanisms that: + +1. Dynamically adjust thresholds based on signer activity and response times. +2. Automatically lower thresholds after verified emergency triggers. +3. Require proof-of-activity from signers to maintain voting rights. +4. Automatically remove or replace inactive signers after defined periods. + +### Section 2: Tiered Emergency Response + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain tiered emergency response systems that: + +1. Implement graduated authority levels with different thresholds based on urgency. +2. Maintain pre-approved emergency response playbooks with automatic execution. +3. Deploy circuit breaker mechanisms with lower thresholds for emergencies. +4. Grant time-limited emergency powers with clear scope limitations. +5. Establish protocol-level emergency responses for consensus failures between implementations. + +### Section 3: Signer Accountability + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall ensure signer accountability through: + +1. Clear response time requirements for different categories of actions. +2. Mandatory delegation mechanisms for temporary unavailability. +3. Performance metrics and public dashboards for signer activity. +4. Economic incentives and disincentives to ensure responsiveness. +5. Formal removal procedures for consistently inactive signers. + +### Section 4: Backup Governance + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain backup governance systems including: + +1. Shadow multisigs that can be activated after verified inactivity periods. +2. Decentralized fallback mechanisms when primary governance fails. +3. Community override capabilities for deadlocked decisions. +4. Automatic escalation paths when response times exceed thresholds. +5. Cross-implementation governance mechanisms to prevent client-specific governance failures. + +### Section 5: Governance Health Monitoring + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall continuously monitor governance health through: + +1. Regular governance participation audits. +2. Early warning systems for declining signer activity. +3. Simulation exercises to test emergency response capabilities. +4. Public reporting on governance health metrics. +5. Implementation team participation metrics. +6. Proactive replacement procedures before critical thresholds are compromised. + +### Section 6: Cross-Collective Governance + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall implement cross-collective governance mechanisms that: + +1. Enable escalation between implementation teams and the Technical Fellowship during emergencies. +2. Create composite origins that combine members from multiple implementation teams with specialized expertise. +3. Implement weighted voting across teams based on domain expertise for specific decisions. +4. Provide domain-specific failover between teams, respecting expertise boundaries. +5. Ensure no single implementation team can block critical protocol decisions. + +### Section 7: Blockchain-Native Implementation + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall ensure blockchain-native implementation of governance mechanisms through: + +1. Utilization of flexible origin patterns for authority delegation. +2. Implementation of on-chain activity tracking with automatic threshold adjustments. +3. Creation of graduated emergency response triggers accessible to multiple collectives. +4. Implementation of mandatory delegation through cryptographic verification. +5. Enablement of transparent, immutable records of governance participation and emergency responses. +6. Automatic execution of predefined response playbooks. + +## ARTICLE VI: PROHIBITED ACTIONS + +The following actions shall be expressly prohibited within the JAM Implementers DAO: + +1. Prolonged blockades or restrictions of basic protocol necessities that cause humanitarian crises for participants without achieving the objective of addressing bad actors. +2. Collective accountability measures that impact individuals with proof of personhood for actions they did not personally commit. +3. Use of constitutional mechanisms by leaders to serve political interests, whether for: + a. External leverage in diplomatic arrangements with other DAOs or ecosystems, or + b. Internal advantage among implementation teams, embedded ecosystems, parachain teams, or governance factions. +4. Exploitation of governance cycles to manipulate decision-making. +5. Actions that compromise the core service profile values (resilience, generality, performance, coherency, accessibility). +6. Requiring specialized governance work without secure payment commitments, proper attribution, or legal protection. +7. Intentional implementation of incompatible clients that could cause network splits. +8. Withholding critical security information from other implementation teams. +9. Imposing or encouraging unsustainable work practices that endanger contributor health, including excessive work hours, lack of rest periods, or unreasonable deadlines. +10. Retaliating against contributors who raise concerns about team health or work conditions. +11. Refusing to adopt or implement appropriate codes of conduct or health standards when representing Polkadot in any capacity, especially when receiving treasury funding or claiming official status. + +## ARTICLE VII: IMPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENTS + +### Section 1: General Implementation + +All implementations of these Constitutional Safeguards shall: + +1. Align with the Polkadot DAO Constitution and the Polkadot Technical Fellowship Manifesto's principles of inclusivity and equality. +2. Maintain transparency in all governance activities. +3. Uphold the ethical standards outlined in the [JAM Implementers DAO Code of Conduct](./code_of_conduct.md). +4. Allow for constitutional amendments through proper OpenGov processes. +5. Ensure the system continues to honor its declared service profile regardless of economic or political pressures. +6. Support the development of multiple, interoperable client implementations. + +### Section 2: Amendment Process + +Any JAM Implementers DAO member may propose changes to this Constitution by submitting a proposal for vote in the JAM Implementers DAO Discord group. Amendments require majority approval (≥50%) and must meet the quorum set for the Big Spender Track. + +For amendments related to technical specifications, implementation requirements, or protocol interoperability: +1. Proposals should be submitted as JAM Improvement Proposals (JIPs) +2. Technical Fellowship should be consulted for technical feasibility review, if necessary and possible +3. Ambassador Fellowship should be consulted for ecosystem impact assessment, if necessary and possible +4. Public discussion should be initiated for a period of no less than 28 days + +### Section 3: Continuous Improvement + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall continuously improve these Constitutional Safeguards through: + +1. Development of specific proposals for early warning indicators. +2. Drafting of detailed intervention protocols with clear triggers and limitations. +3. Creation of educational resources to help implementation teams and ecosystem teams identify concerning patterns. +4. Establishment of working groups to refine these concepts. +5. Development of metrics to measure and ensure client implementations maintain core service profile values. +6. Regular review of implementation standards and interoperability requirements. + +## ARTICLE VIII: RATIFICATION + +These Constitutional Safeguards shall take effect upon approval through the OpenGov process and shall be binding upon all participants in the JAM Implementers DAO. The binding nature of these safeguards is essential to ensure effective governance, protect against ecosystem threats, and provide the necessary foundation for the incentive and disincentive mechanisms described throughout this document. + +The architecture of Polkadot's ranked collective pallet and origin composition system enables the sophisticated governance mechanisms described herein, effectively addressing common governance paralysis problems that have plagued many DAOs. By allowing dynamic authority delegation between specialized collectives and implementation teams, the system creates redundancy without sacrificing security or accountability. + +## ARTICLE IX: TECHNICAL FELLOWSHIP INTEGRATION + +### Section 1: Technical Fellowship Relationship + +1. The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain a formal relationship with the Polkadot Technical Fellowship. +2. Successful implementation of a JAM protocol client shall qualify members for fast-tracked Technical Fellowship membership. +3. Technical Fellowship members shall provide expert review of implementation proposals. +4. The Technical Fellowship shall serve as the ultimate technical authority for resolving disputes between implementation teams. + +### Section 2: Implementation Standards + +1. All JAM protocol client implementations must adhere to the specifications outlined in the JAM Graypaper. +2. Implementation teams must regularly demonstrate interoperability with other client implementations. +3. Technical standards for client implementations shall be maintained and updated by the Technical Fellowship. +4. Implementation teams must participate in regular cross-client testing and validation exercises. + +### Section 3: Client Diversity + +1. The JAM Implementers DAO shall actively promote client diversity through funding and support mechanisms. +2. No single client implementation shall be allowed to dominate the network. +3. Economic incentives shall be designed to encourage the adoption of multiple client implementations. +4. Implementation teams shall collaborate on security issues while maintaining independent codebases. + +## ARTICLE X: VERSION CONTROL + +### Section 1: Document Version History + +This constitution is versioned to track changes and improvements over time: + +| Version | Date | Description | Contributors | +|---------|------|-------------|-------------| +| v0.01 | 2025-07-28 | Initial draft of JAM Implementers DAO Constitutional Safeguards | JAM Implementers DAO | +| v0.02 | 2025-07-29 | Refined language around consequences and accountability measures while maintaining strong boundaries for prohibited actions that could harm the ecosystem. Added version control section. | JAM Implementers DAO, with feedback from community members on balancing language and focusing on rewards. | +| v0.03 | 2025-07-31 | Added Article XI on Sustainable Work Standards and Ecosystem Wellbeing with comprehensive provisions including: scientific evidence preamble, emergency work protocols with mathematical consistency, balanced multi-stakeholder governance, expanded endorsement requirements covering all ecosystem branding, and resource-constrained implementation guidance. Expanded prohibited actions to include unsustainable work practices. | JAM Implementers DAO, with feedback from ecosystem health advocates and reference to scientific research on overwork health impacts. | +| v0.04 | 2025-07-31 | Refined Article XI to balance Sustainable Work Standards with individual freedom by: adding a new individual autonomy and freedom section, clarifying the distinction between treasury-funded initiatives and independent contributors, framing standards as risk management measures, and focusing accountability measures on treasury-funded activities. Created companion justification document explaining the rationale for the balanced approach. | JAM Implementers DAO, with feedback from community members concerned about individual autonomy and innovation. | +| v0.05 | 2025-07-31 | Enhanced governance accountability in Article XI by: requiring on-chain documentation of emergency decision-making processes and dissenting opinions, streamlining on-call rotation requirements, and implementing a standardized Humane Work Standards Compliance Checklist with self-assessment and random audit mechanisms. These changes strengthen transparency while maintaining practical implementation within resource constraints. | JAM Implementers DAO, with input from governance advocates focused on accountability, transparency, and on-chain verification. | +| v0.06 | 2025-08-02 | Enhanced accountability Section 5 of Article III and introduced Section 6 of Article III on treasury procurement standards. | JAM Implementers DAO. | +| v0.07 | 2025-08-02 | Update amendment process in Section 2 of Article X to include Technical and Ambassador Fellowship consultation requirements. | JAM Implementers DAO. | + +### Section 2: Amendment Guidelines + +When updating this constitution: +1. Increment the version number appropriately (major.minor format) +2. Document all changes in the version history table +3. Acknowledge contributors who provided valuable feedback +4. Ensure changes follow the amendment process outlined in Article VII + +## ARTICLE XI: SUSTAINABLE WORK STANDARDS AND ECOSYSTEM WELLBEING + +**Preamble**: The JAM Implementers DAO recognizes that extreme overwork poses documented health risks and can lead to serious consequences including death. Research has shown that working more than 54 hours per week significantly increases health risks, and the World Health Organization has reported that overwork contributes to hundreds of thousands of deaths annually worldwide. These standards are established not merely as aspirational goals but as essential protections against documented harms that have affected workers across multiple industries including technology, finance, and retail. + +Compliance with these requirements serves as an essential risk management measure that helps reduce potential liability for the JAM Implementers DAO, its governance participants, and the broader ecosystem in cases where team members might suffer health consequences from overwork. These standards are designed to balance ecosystem protection with individual freedom, recognizing that innovation often stems from passionate individuals working intensely on projects they believe in, while preventing systemic requirements of chronic overwork as a condition for participation in treasury-funded initiatives. + +### Section 1: Core Principles + +The JAM Implementers DAO recognizes that the health, wellbeing, and sustainability of all ecosystem participants are essential to the long-term success of the ecosystem. Therefore: + +1. The health and wellbeing of all participants shall be considered a fundamental constitutional value. +2. Sustainable work practices shall be mandatory for all ecosystem activities, whether treasury-funded, volunteer-based, or otherwise. +3. No economic incentive shall be designed in a way that encourages or requires harmful overwork. +4. The JAM Implementers DAO shall actively prevent conditions that lead to burnout, exhaustion, or health deterioration. +5. These protections shall apply equally to all participants regardless of role, seniority, compensation model, or contribution status. +6. No disclaimer, waiver, terms and conditions, or other legal instrument may be used to circumvent these standards or require participants to surrender these protections. +7. These standards are aligned with Article 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which establishes that "Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay." +8. Participation in multiple roles (such as governance and technical implementation) shall not be used as justification for failing to satisfy critical accountabilities, particularly those essential to network operations or security. When workload across multiple roles threatens to compromise critical responsibilities, participants must prioritize their core accountabilities or delegate appropriately. Participants shall not: + a. Occupy governance positions without actively fulfilling associated responsibilities. + b. Claim ignorance of governance matters due to focus on other roles. + c. Retain decision-making authority in roles they cannot adequately fulfill due to competing commitments. + d. Use technical or specialized roles as shields against governance accountability. + +### Section 1A: Individual Autonomy and Freedom + +The JAM Implementers DAO respects the autonomy of individual contributors and recognizes that: + +1. **Individual Choice**: Independent contributors retain full freedom to determine their own work schedules and intensity based on personal preferences and circumstances. + +2. **Mandatory vs. Recommended**: These standards are: + a. **Mandatory** for treasury-funded initiatives to prevent systemic overwork requirements + b. **Recommended best practices** for independent contributors to consider voluntarily + +3. **Innovation Protection**: These standards do not restrict voluntary intense work when: + a. Freely chosen by the individual (not required or expected) + b. Driven by personal passion, innovation, or deep focus + c. Ideally limited to short periods with recommended rest periods between intense work sessions (independent contributors are encouraged, but not required, to follow the Wellbeing Time Commitments defined in Section 2) + +4. **Risk Management Focus**: These standards primarily exist to: + a. Protect the ecosystem's reputation + b. Reduce potential liability for the JAM Implementers DAO and its governance participants + c. Prevent contradictions with core values of human dignity + d. Not to control individual work preferences or limit innovation + +### Section 2: Humane Work Standards + +The following humane work standards apply to all JAM Implementers DAO operations, treasury-funded initiatives, and projects officially endorsed through Web3 Foundation recognition or formal governance votes executed through OpenGov. + +Participants must comply with all applicable local, regional, federal, and international laws and regulations regarding work standards in their respective jurisdictions. The standards outlined below shall apply in cases where such laws and regulations do not exist, are not defined, or where these standards provide greater protections than those required by law. These standards shall apply to all participants regardless of geographic location, recognizing that human wellbeing needs are universal and not limited by jurisdictional boundaries: + +1. **Reasonable Work Hours**: Participants should have the freedom to maintain balanced lives with work expectations not exceeding 40 hours per week on average, with a maximum of 48 hours including overtime when averaged over a reference period, aligning with Article 6 of the European Union's Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC). + a. For night work involving special hazards or heavy physical or mental strain (including event management, coordination, or leadership responsibilities), work shall not exceed 8 hours in any 24-hour period, consistent with research on cognitive performance degradation during extended high-intensity work and ensuring at least 11 hours remain for the required rest period. + b. Where the working day is longer than 6 hours, every participant is entitled to a rest break, aligning with Article 4 of the European Union's Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC). +2. **Wellbeing Time Commitments**: + a. Sufficient daily rest of at least 11 consecutive hours in any 24-hour period, aligning with the European Union's Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC). + b. Additional weekly rest time beyond daily rest periods, equivalent to at least 24 hours per week dedicated to non-work activities, which may be taken as one continuous period or split into multiple periods according to individual preferences, with teams implementing staggered schedules to ensure operational continuity while respecting individual rest requirements. This provision intentionally modifies Article 5 of the European Union's Working Time Directive (2003/88/EC), which requires an uninterrupted 24-hour rest period, to better accommodate the decentralized and global nature of DAO operations while maintaining equivalent total rest time. + c. At least 20 days of complete disengagement per year for all participants directly engaged with JAM Implementers DAO activities or treasury-funded initiatives, with participants free to distribute these throughout the year based on their wellbeing needs. + d. For the broader ecosystem, these standards shall serve as recommended best practices that participants can voluntarily adopt. + e. The JAM Implementers DAO shall share educational resources and guidance on implementing these standards within its financial and operational capacity. + f. The JAM Implementers DAO shall advocate for these standards to be incorporated into the Polkadot DAO Constitution to ensure broader ecosystem adoption and consistent application across treasury-funded initiatives,and projects officially endorsed through governance vote or by authorized representatives +3. **Economic Necessity Exception**: + a. The JAM Implementers DAO recognizes that economic necessity may require individuals to work beyond these standards to meet basic needs. In such cases, the focus shall be on addressing the root cause through fair incentives when possible, or through scope reduction, prioritization, and delegation when financial resources are limited. Treasury-funded initiatives shall be structured to provide incentives commensurate with the work required, and within the constraints of available funding. When the JAM Implementers DAO cannot provide adequate incentives for a proposed scope of work, the scope shall be reduced or the initiative may not proceed unless alternative incentive sources are secured, rather than expecting excessive hours without appropriate incentives. + b. Scope adjustments shall be made based on objective assessment of work requirements and available resources, not based on individual financial circumstances, to maintain fairness and avoid creating perverse incentives that could reward unsustainable practices or disadvantage those who work within established standards. + c. When economic necessity drives overwork, this shall be documented as a systemic issue requiring governance attention rather than normalized as acceptable practice. +4. **Emergency Work Considerations**: + a. Emergency work periods shall be categorized based on intensity and strain, aligning with scientific research on cognitive fatigue and safety standards: + i. High-intensity emergency work (such as urgent bug fixing, critical problem-solving, or high-stress coordination) shall not exceed 11 hours in a 24-hour period, consistent with research on cognitive performance degradation during extended high-intensity work and ensuring at least 11 hours remain for the required rest period. + ii. Lower-intensity emergency work (such as monitoring dashboards or maintaining standby presence) may extend to 13 hours in a 24-hour period (calculated as 24 hours minus the mandatory 11-hour rest period), with mandatory short breaks of at least 15 minutes every 2 hours. These breaks should involve stepping away from screens, preferably with exposure to natural light when possible, and engaging in physical movement. Alertness-monitoring protocols must be in place, aligning with EU regulations for certain emergency services while ensuring the minimum 11-hour rest period is preserved. + b. All emergency work shall be followed by an additional Wellbeing Time Commitment (Section 2 Item 2): + i. For high-intensity emergency work, a minimum rest period of at least 11 hours must follow the work period. + ii. For lower-intensity emergency work, a minimum rest period equal to the duration of the work performed must follow, with a minimum of 11 hours. + c. No participant shall be required to participate in more than 3 high-intensity emergency response events per month under normal circumstances. + d. Safety, health, or wellbeing-critical emergencies shall be exempt from the monthly limit when necessary to prevent harm, provided that: + i. The emergency is properly documented as critical, including: + 1. The specific nature of the threat to safety, health, or wellbeing + 2. Why immediate action was required + 3. Why the emergency could not be addressed within normal work standards + 4. The expected impact if the emergency had not been addressed + ii. Enhanced incentives and rest periods are provided afterward. + iii. A post-incident review identifies staffing adjustments to prevent future overreliance on the same responders. + iv. A risk assessment is conducted to ensure that the responders' wellbeing is not compromised to a degree that exceeds the potential benefit to those being helped. + v. When multiple responders would exceed their limits, a collective decision-making process must be used to determine the appropriate response that minimizes overall harm. This process shall: + 1. Include at minimum the technical lead responsible for the affected system, a governance representative, and an uninvolved third party with expertise in wellbeing or ethics + 2. Consider both the technical urgency of the emergency and the wellbeing impact on responders + 3. Document the decision-making process, including dissenting opinions + 4. Be conducted according to procedures defined in the Critical Emergency Response Framework + e. The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain a regularly updated Critical Emergency Response Framework that: + i. Proactively identifies and categorizes potential emergency scenarios + ii. Establishes clear criteria for what constitutes a "critical emergency" exempt from standard limits + iii. Defines response protocols and decision trees for rapid assessment during emergencies + iv. Specifies communication procedures and escalation paths + v. Is reviewed and updated at least semi-annually based on operational experience +5. **On-call Rotations**: + a. On-call duties shall be clearly defined in writing, with explicit scope limitations and escalation paths, and distributed equitably among qualified team members. + b. No participant shall be on-call for more than 1 week at a time or more than 2 weeks per month. + c. On-call incentives shall be provided regardless of whether emergencies occur, with appropriate recognition for volunteer participants. + d. On-call duty definitions shall be reviewed and updated at least quarterly to prevent scope creep. + +### Section 3: Monitoring and Response + +The following monitoring and response mechanisms apply to all JAM Implementers DAO operations, treasury-funded initiatives, and projects officially endorsed through formal governance votes and executed on OpenGov. The JAM Implementers DAO shall, subject to available funding and resources, implement these systems to monitor and protect sustainable work practices across the ecosystem: + +1. **Work Standards Assessments**: + a. Regular participant surveys shall be conducted at least quarterly using selective disclosure mechanisms (such as zero-knowledge proofs) to verify unique on-chain identity and proof of personhood while preserving privacy of individual responses. + b. The JAM Implementers DAO shall maintain a standardized Humane Work Standards Compliance Checklist that: + i. Covers all key provisions of this Article, including work hours, wellbeing time commitments, emergency work limits, and on-call rotation requirements + ii. Is published on-chain for transparency and immutability + iii. Is used to evaluate all treasury-funded initiatives and officially endorsed projects + iv. Includes objective, measurable criteria for each standard + v. Is updated at least annually to reflect evolving best practices and community feedback + c. All treasury-funded initiatives and officially endorsed projects shall complete a self-assessment using the Compliance Checklist at project initiation and at regular intervals thereafter, with results stored on-chain. + d. The JAM Implementers DAO shall conduct random compliance audits of at least 20% of active treasury-funded initiatives each quarter, with findings and remediation plans published on-chain. +2. **Wellbeing Metrics**: + a. Self-reported work pattern data that contributors can voluntarily share through privacy-preserving mechanisms. + b. Aggregated, anonymous workload indicators derived from on-chain activity with explicit contributor consent. + c. Team-level wellbeing assessments based on collectively defined indicators rather than individual monitoring. +3. **Support Mechanisms**: + a. Graduated response mechanisms proportional to the severity of concerns. + b. A designated Wellbeing Working Group, elected through on-chain governance, shall have authority to recommend pausing non-critical work during periods of unsustainable practices. Such recommendations shall be submitted to JAM Implementers DAO governance for consideration, with a required decision within 72 hours. The specific voting mechanism shall be defined in the operational guidelines, with provisions to prevent governance paralysis if quorum cannot be reached. The JAM Implementers DAO shall seek explicit upfront incentive commitments from external sources such as the Polkadot Agents Program before activating this rapid response capability, ensuring participants are never expected to work without pre-committed incentives, even if external programs typically operate on retroactive incentive models. +4. **Whistleblower Protections**: + a. Reporting channels for work standards non-compliance that utilize selective disclosure mechanisms (such as zero-knowledge proofs) to verify unique on-chain identity and proof of personhood while preserving privacy of individual reporters. + b. Protection from retaliation for those reporting concerns, with identity protection guaranteed through cryptographic methods. + c. Independent review of reported non-compliance with verification of report authenticity through the on-chain identity and proof of personhood system. + +### Section 4: Treasury Funding and Endorsement Requirements + +All initiatives seeking treasury funding, endorsement, or other support shall comply with the following requirements, regardless of funding amount or mechanism (including but not limited to proposals, bounties, grants, sponsorships, and partnerships). These requirements also extend to initiatives not receiving direct funding but benefiting from official endorsement, promotional support, ecosystem branding (such as "Powered by JAM", "Powered by Polkadot", or similar ecosystem associations), or other non-monetary resources from the JAM Implementers DAO: + +1. **Sustainable Work**: Include clear sustainable work provisions in their proposals, bounty descriptions, grants, or other funding or support requests that: + a. Specify how they will prevent systemic overwork, including realistic timelines that don't require unsustainable hours + b. Budget for adequate team size to ensure work distribution complies with the Reasonable Work Hours standards in Section 2.1 + c. Include proper contingency staffing to minimize the need to rely on emergency protocols as defined in Section 3 + +2. **Accountability Mechanisms**: + a. Demonstrate understanding of these constitutional requirements + b. Establish transparent reporting on actual hours worked compared to estimates, activation of emergency protocols, and team wellbeing metrics throughout the project lifecycle + c. Accept that non-compliance with these standards constitutes grounds for reassessment of future staged milestone incentives that were conditional upon adherence to sustainable work standards, potential withdrawal of endorsement, and potential ineligibility for future treasury support + +3. **Risk Management**: Include contingency plans that: + a. Identify potential high-pressure periods in advance and outline strategies to mitigate workload spikes + b. Specify how critical functions will be maintained without requiring unsustainable work + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall, subject to available funding and resources, maintain templates and examples of sustainable work provisions to assist applicants in meeting these requirements. When such templates are not yet available, applicants remain responsible for including appropriate sustainable work provisions in their requests. + +### Section 5: Education and Resources + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall, subject to available funding and resources, provide: + +1. Educational resources on sustainable work practices and burnout prevention. +2. Training for team leads and independent contributors on maintaining sustainable work environments. +3. Access to mental health resources for all participants. +4. Regular workshops on work-life balance in distributed teams and for solo contributors. +5. Documentation of best practices for sustainable remote work. + +When resource constraints limit the provision of these resources, the JAM Implementers DAO shall prioritize those with the greatest impact on participant wellbeing and identify external resources that participants can access independently. + +### Section 6: Implementation and Accountability + +The JAM Implementers DAO shall, subject to available funding and resources, implement these standards through: + +1. Regular audits of work patterns across treasury-funded ecosystem activities. +2. Public reporting on compliance with sustainable work standards for treasury-funded initiatives. +3. Economic incentive adjustments for teams, projects, or initiatives that are found to be non-compliant with these standards. +4. Temporary or permanent ineligibility for treasury funding, endorsement, or other official recognition following repeated non-compliance. +5. Recognition and incentives for teams and initiatives demonstrating exemplary sustainable work practices. +6. Nullification of any terms, conditions, waivers, or disclaimers that attempt to circumvent these standards. +7. Prohibition against requiring participants to "opt out" of these protections as a condition of participation in treasury-funded initiatives. + +When resource constraints limit full implementation of these accountability measures, the JAM Implementers DAO shall prioritize transparency, education, and prevention over accountability measures, while maintaining core protections against the most severe non-compliance.