Another thing missing is the procedure when multiple members recuse themselves from a decision. It seems important:
(a) that decisions are always made by more than one individual
(b) that applicants are not disqualified from receiving grants on the grounds of (e.g.) having COIs with multiple fund managers.
It is also worth thinking about COIs when it comes to board composition. Having multiple board members that are more isolated romantically/socially/geographically from the Bay Area scene would make the fund more robust to COIs, particularly if the standards for recusal are raised.
I’m not sure information about past romantic/sexual relationships/metamourships should ever be made public.
not a healthy community norm
reputational hazards for individuals, the fund, and the community
grantees might be discouraged from applying due to concerns about publicizing their personal lives
individuals might feel pressured into publicly disclosing personal information in order to make or receive a grant, or might later come to regret publicly disclosing the information
large scope for unforeseen negative consequences
An external board should be available to deal with situations like this—they can then either insist on recusal, or judge the COI not to be a problem.