This HIP will formalize a request to the dao for removal of Clement Lesaege as a Mission Board member and admin of Snapshot, given the latest and past events of anti-dao and anti-democratic maneuvers. To give a proper rationale and to clarify proper reasons for this, I created another post explaining what is my personal motivation to write this hip.
HIP: 48 title: Removal of Clement Lesaege as mission board member author: ludoviko.ETH status: Phase 2 created: 2022-01-06
This HIP proposes the removal of Clement Leseage from the mission board and the snapshot admin.
Given the latest events regarding the actions of Clement as an admin for the Snapshot polls, and the overall attitude of constantly delaying any advancement or progress of any proposals that obstructs his own agenda, I am proposing the removal of Clement Lesaege from the mission board, based on the premise that he is not aligned with the values of Democratization and Decentralization and respect for privacy of individuals being registered in the DAO.
- Obstructing normal governance procedures. There is a recent incident in which the proposers for HIPs on Snapshot was unilaterally deleted, against the advice from the other admin of the platform Santi Siri, because it was being done without proper consultation with the DAO.
- This later issue, along with the creation of HIP-34 itself (which dramatically decreases open participation for proposals), created a situation that now requires two different and new HIPs to solve the issue.
- An unsuccessful attempt to remove a valid admin from the Telegram group (for the record, I was the admin asked to be removed).
- Disregarding serious security threats to the registering process (metadata issue): When warned about this issue, Clement lowered the priority of a huge security threat in which personal georeferencing data was being leaked into the registry profiles. In a forum post he mentioned that having personal data leaked was “a nice thing to have”
- Systematically obstaculizing any process that helps humans register (352, vouchallengers, etc) sometimes suggesting that challenges are good and vouch-and-challenge attacks are part of the normal mechanism:
- Example 1, stating against better explanation of proper vouching Incentivize better, more responsible vouching - #2 by clesaege
- Example 2, stating that the only way to keep deposits low is keeping the challenges high Challenges and removals - ¿it's always fair? - #10 by clesaege
- Example 3, falsely accusing of being “undemocratic” a democratic poll [Hiring] Product Manager - #68 by clesaege and this is critical for someone holding veto power in snapshot.
- Example 4, saying that it is “perfectly fine” and having the opportunity to withdraw from a mistake is a “courtesy” and not a right.
- Following the previous point, making Proof of Humanity a dispute-creating machine.
- Sabotaging or lack of respect to proper procedure
- Under-specifying regulations so that he can later interpret the normative as he unilaterally thinks (basically all the hips he authored, including HIP-34)
- Lack of proper spirit of collaboration with the community, evidenced by lack of participation in main groups.
- Stalling the hiring process to the point that the actuall hiring was put in hibernation [Hiring] Product Manager.
- It is worth also noting the contradiction with other comments in which he stated that hiring should be done fast [Hiring] Developer - #5 by clesaege
- Taking decisions in the background without proper consultation to DAO members, or disregarding alternative perspectives.
- Not acknowledging the issues regarding the concentration and dominance of a priviledge few in the Kleros Humanity Court and not doing anything to prevent such an abnormal degree of centralization.
This HIP was left on hold since its creation, but recent events regarding removal of dissenting members of the DAO from telegram channels have sparked the interest of the community to move forward with this proposal.
If Phase 3 binding vote is approved, the position that Clement Lesaege is occupying as a Mission Board Member will become vacant. (for Phase 3 it could be debated if he can re-apply for the position in the next term).