1. Introduction
This proposal introduces the Terra Classic Ethics & Conduct Code (TCECC) —
a chain-wide ethical and behavioral framework
-
respectful communication
-
transparent governance
-
responsible validator conduct
-
reduced spam, manipulation, and misinformation
-
a healthier and more sustainable community culture
Alongside the TCECC, this Script introduces a Governance Review Mode, allowing the community to democratically evaluate alleged violations of the Code before taking any final action.
A deposit mechanism is included to prevent abuse and ensure seriousness of submitted cases.
2. Why Terra Classic Needs an Ethics & Conduct Code
Terra Classic is completely decentralized.
This leads to several structural challenges:
-
lack of behavioral standards
-
governance manipulation attempts
-
spam proposals or low-quality submissions
-
misinformation and FUD
-
no framework for ethical validator behavior
-
no formal, democratic method to evaluate harmful conduct
A chain-wide Ethics & Conduct Code solves these issues by creating:
clear expectations
transparency and responsibility
reduced social conflict
better governance quality
protection against manipulation
unity in community standards
3. The Terra Classic Ethics & Conduct Code (TCECC)
The TCECC consists of three sections:
3.1 Section A – General Conduct
All community members are expected to:
-
communicate respectfully
-
avoid personal attacks
-
remain factual
-
refrain from FUD, spam, misinformation, or manipulation
-
disclose financial interests when relevant
Prohibited behavior includes:
-
intentional misinformation
-
spamming threads or repeating content excessively
-
hate speech or harassment
-
brigading or attempting to artificially influence opinion
-
coordinated disinformation campaigns
3.2 Section B – Governance Ethics
Governance participants should:
-
submit clear, well-structured proposals
-
justify arguments with evidence
-
avoid vote-buying or coercion
-
refrain from using multiple identities (Sybil behavior)
-
respect community decisions
Prohibited:
-
spam proposals
-
copy-paste manipulation
-
distorting votes through fake accounts
-
validator coercion (“If you vote X, I will Y”)
3.3 Section C – Validator Conduct Code (V-CoC)
Validators carry unique responsibilities.
Validators must:
-
provide transparent basic information
-
maintain stable, monitored, secure infrastructure
-
apply upgrades appropriately and timely
-
avoid running Sybil validators
-
avoid misleading delegators
-
refrain from manipulative governance behavior
Violations do not cause technical slashing, but governance may issue:
-
public warnings
-
risk classifications
-
recommendations to undelegate
-
requests to dApp frontends to show risk labels
4. Governance Review Mode (NEW)
The Review Mode allows evaluation of alleged TCECC violations before the community votes on concrete actions.
4.1 How Review Mode Works
When submitting a governance proposal, the proposer chooses between:
-
Normal Mode
-
Review Mode (NEW)
→ asks ONLY whether the case should be evaluated under the TCECC
The community votes:
“Should this behavior be reviewed under the TCECC?”
YES → The case enters the review process
NO → Case ends immediately
4.2 Community Review Panel
If YES passes:
-
a temporary panel of 3–7 volunteer community members forms
-
panel is case-specific and non-permanent
-
panel reviews evidence and statements
-
panel produces a final report
-
panel has no enforcement power — only interpretation of the Code
4.3 Second Governance Proposal
After the review:
-
a follow-up proposal presents the findings
-
community votes on recommendations
Governance remains the final authority.
5. Deposit System (Anti-Spam & Accountability)
To prevent misuse of Review Mode:
5.1 Required Deposit
A Review Mode proposal requires a deposit, e.g.:
50,000 LUNC (example)
5.2 Refund for Valid Cases
If the case is confirmed as valid:
- 100% of the deposit is refunded
5.3 Forfeit for Invalid or Malicious Cases
If the case is:
-
baseless
-
malicious
-
spam
-
unsupported by evidence
→ deposit is forfeited to the Community Pool.
5.4 Optional Reward
Governance may optionally approve a small reward for highly valuable cases.
6. Anti-Spam Mechanisms
This system inherently reduces spam by adding:
-
deposit requirements
-
proposal quality expectations
-
review gatekeeping by governance
-
behavioral standards for community members
-
limitations for repeat offenders in review panels
-
validator anti-Sybil expectations
7. Process Overview (Flow Diagram)
Proposal Creation
|
v
+-----------------------------+
| Select Proposal Type |
| - Normal |
| - Review Mode (NEW) |
+-----------------------------+
|
v
+-----------------------------+
| Governance Vote |
| "Should this case be |
| reviewed?" |
+-----------------------------+
|
YES | NO
|
| (NO → End)
v
+-----------------------------+
| TCECC Review Begins |
| - Panel Formation |
| - Evidence & Analysis |
+-----------------------------+
|
v
+-----------------------------+
| Panel Final Report |
+-----------------------------+
|
v
+-----------------------------+
| Second Governance Proposal |
| (Vote on Recommendations) |
+-----------------------------+
8. Benefits
establishes ethical standards for the entire ecosystem
improves governance quality
reduces spam and manipulation
protects validators from false accusations
protects the community from harmful behavior
ensures full decentralization and fairness
introduces a structured method to resolve issues
no technical changes to the protocol needed
This is open to discuss not a done Proposal, maybe it brings an term by future Discussions.
Also let us think more in the future where News can change many things and if we not able to stand as a community together , fast, then we would have a chaos in maybe big Dimensions where it can be good to set a sign Fast together.
Thanks for your Time