Open yeqbfgxjiq opened 5 years ago
How is this random seed generated in a way that is verifiably random?
For every term the initial blocknumber hash is used as a source of entropy:
draftTerm.randomness = block.blockhash(draftTerm.randomnessBN);
When it says that a juror can occupy multiple seats, does that mean multiple seats in the same jury of the same case or multiple seats but in separate juries for separate cases
A juror can occupy multiple seats in the same case and in the same appeal round (so, in the same jury, yes).
What if someone is in a dispute with a whale? (...) Is there a defense against this?
I would let @lkngtn or @izqui elaborate more on this, but the collateral could be crowsourced. People would have economic incentive on helping "the poor" here if they think he's right, as they could make money winning the case. We may actually provide a Contract to allow managing this crwodfunding easily.
Can new evidence be submitted when a dispute is raised to a higher court, or is the evidence submitted at the beginning of the process all that is allowed? (...)
Interesting. Not sure about it. What would be the benefit of poorly presenting evidence in first rounds though?
Can new evidence be submitted when a dispute is raised to a higher court, or is the evidence submitted at the beginning of the process all that is allowed? (...)
Interesting. Not sure about it. What would be the benefit of poorly presenting evidence in first rounds though?
Time.
Any of these scenarios, and more that aren't listed, could change a case dramatically. If jurors in a lower and earlier court make a ruling based on 1 set of data, but then new data emerges in subsequent courts (within the game of the Aragon Court, or out of band via social media), it would make sense that the rulings could be different. Punishing the earlier jurors seems like a poor way to handle this. What other options are available?
Overall the paper made a lot of sense. I think the Court will help to balance out the human aspect in DAOs and this will make them able to help with many more problems that code alone could not. I had a few questions though:
In the Juror Drafting section it says:
How is this random seed generated in a way that is verifiably random?
When it says that a juror can occupy multiple seats, does that mean multiple seats in the same jury of the same case or multiple seats but in separate juries for separate cases. Since jurors are chosen via randomized process, this was not clear.
In the Appeals section it says:
What if someone is in a dispute with a whale? The whale can easily extend the process to the highest court, but the average ANT holder might not have the collateral for those fees. This would result in the whale winning by default even if they are in the wrong. Is there a defense against this?
In the Final Ruling section it says:
Can new evidence be submitted when a dispute is raised to a higher court, or is the evidence submitted at the beginning of the process all that is allowed?
Here's a few thoughts on that:
How do you defend against this?