HIP: 73 Title: Removal of Clement Lesaege as mission board member Author: ludoviko.eth, v4len.eth, vice, lauraleticialopez.eth (Lety), pablo, drlorente97.eth Status: Phase 2 Created: 2022-01-06 Updated: 2022-10-15
This HIP proposes the removal of Clement Leseage from the mission board and the snapshot administration.
The event on EF Devcon VI where Clément produced an incident involving a violent and unsustained reaction towards Santi Siri as a speaker, has sparked debates about the fitness of Clement as a Member of the Mission Board. Based on this and previous 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, the authors of this proposal are proposing:
- The destitution of Clement Lesaege as a Mission Board Member, based on the premise that, in our opinion, he is not aligned with the values of Democratization and Decentralization and respect for privacy of individuals being registered in the DAO.
Here is a rundown of events that accumulated since the inception of the proposal:
- Not acknowledging the issues regarding the concentration and dominance of a priviledged few in the Kleros Humanity Court and not doing anything to prevent such an abnormal degree of centralization.
- Over-reaching MBM authority by numerous attempts (some successful) to demote, and then censor moderators from Telegram groups. An abuse of the mechanisms of those channels to supress dissent (36 warn actions in three days after a violent takeover of the now Kleros’ PoH group). The warns and the bans in the Kleros PoH group even included other Mission Board Members since then.
- 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. The best answer he could give about the priority demotion he replied “Because it’s a nice to have, not a bug or a core feature.”. This was the response of people having their ethereum wallets and their physical addresses exposed in the blockchain virtually forever. The issue is still unsolved in the Kleros front-end.
- Gerrymandering attempts by creating a set of 438 ethereum wallets that automatically delegated to him, even that up to this day, les than one third is registered or even an active member of the PoH community. The alleged “Myanmar” community is as of this day, completely invisible and without any signs of these people having the full picture of how the DAO works or if they had any alternatives to delegate to other candidates.
- 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 that the only way to keep deposits low is keeping the challenges high making Proof of Humanity a dispute-creating machine at expenses of unaware and unprepared humans.
- Example 2, falsely accusing of being “undemocratic” a democratic poll [Hiring] Product Manager - #68 by clesaege 1 and this is critical for someone holding veto power in snapshot.
- Example 3, saying that having the opportunity to withdraw from a mistake where an innocent person is attacked by a vouchallenger is “perfectly fine” and that giving enough time for a person to correct a mistake “courtesy” and not a right.
- Sabotaging or lack of respect to proper procedure:
- Stalling the hiring process to the point that the actual hiring was put in hibernation. It is also worth noting the contradiction with other comments in which he stated that hiring should be done fast.
- Double standards: Arguing about voter fatigue in proposals that he disagreed with, creating voter fatigue himself by cloning a proposal already being voted in order to match his own individual standards.
- Under-specifying regulations (proposals about hiring, about creation of proposals) so that can be later interpreted as he unilaterally thinks.
- Lack of proper spirit of collaboration with the community, showing lack of flexibility when community wanted questions answered.
- Taking decisions in the background without proper consultation to DAO members, or disregarding alternative perspectives.
- The removal of administrative rigths over the Snapshot platform.
Clément was, is, and will still be a key and most valuable collaborator in terms of technical skills. The accumulation of this and other events suggests that Clement is unfit to represent the DAO. This does not mean that he is unable to continue contributing in some other way, and this is not a lack of recognition that he created the protocol.
This is the third time this HIP is refloated. Originally the HIP was left on hold since its creation, but events at that time 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. Mr. Lesaege will not be able to be candidate for the Mission Board Member position (or any derivatives/equivalents from this institution, i.e., positions with executive functions) for the following 2 years starting from the Phase 3 voting.
In addition to this, Mr. Lesaege’s administrative rigths to the snapshot platform will be removed indefinitely