Drafting the 1Hive Community Covenant for Celeste

To enable keepers employed by Celeste to decide on whether decisions and proposals created in the 1Hive DAO belong there, they must have some description of what 1Hive aims to achieve and the rules that 1Hive members must adhere too. For this we will use the 1Hive Community Covenant. The current version can be seen here and between us we should ensure we have read it, agree with it and refine it so that it can be easily referred to by keepers when deciding on disputes related to the 1Hive DAO.

If you have comments about specific parts, please make them on this hackmd version.

Celeste deployment is still a little way off, likely a month or so which gives us time to ensure we’re happy with the Covenant. Note that the Covenant that Celeste keepers refer to when deciding on disputes can be changed after it is deployed by HNY holders through a vote.

For details about Celeste, please see:
Celeste – a brief primer
Disputable Honey Pot, Celeste and Agreement User Process


I think we should include a section in the covenant about enforcement, similar to what we have on https://about.1hive.org/docs/dao/Participation/community-covenant/

I think this helps to clarify the scope and power of the agreement, in that it is possible to block funding proposals to sources that don’t adhere to the agreement. For example if Fauna decides to no longer uphold the covenant as the guidelines for moderating the discord or discourse, it would be reasonable to dispute further funding of the fauna swarm on those grounds. So while the powers granted to fauna members over centralized services like discord are not connected or owned by 1hive dao, they are still held accountable to the covenant indirectly so long as they expect to receive funding from the dao in the future.


I have added what is currently in the about website regarding enforcement to the hackmd version.


I think it’s unclear whether the covenant, as written, protects against funding proposals that do not bring value to 1hive.

While the introduction touches on how we expect common pool funds to be used:

The goal of the 1hive protocol is to foster a healthy community economy by allocating a steady stream of Honey towards development, maintenance, and improvement of the common goods that bring the most value to the 1hive community.

This is not actually encapsulated in the pledge.

To remove all ambiguity, I think it might be worth adding a paragraph that makes this clear.

Something like:

We pledge to do our best to direct common pool funds towards development, maintenance, and improvement of the common goods that bring the most value to the 1Hive community.

1 Like

To elaborate a little:

It might seem like an unnecessary distinction, but I think it’s at least unclear whether it’s primarily the pledge that’s enforced by the covenant, or whether the values hinted at in the preamble also carry weight when settling disputes; either way, we’d be wise to err on the side of caution.

Wondering what your thoughts are @lkngtn?