west summit
This is our current appeal process:
`Appeals are only allowed in cases involving procedural issues. The parties have the right to appeal the outcome, with the DAO deciding if the appeal proceeds.
- Once a settlement proposal has been put forth by the Supreme Court Multisig, any of the Parties can appeal such proposal within a 4-day window, which is encoded in the Designated Smart Contracts, if they believe there is a procedural limited to:
a. Deadlines not being respected by the Judges.
b. Parties weren't notified properly.
c. If one of the Judges leaks confidential information.
d. If one of the Parties has evidence that one of the Judges was biased or bribed.
e. Parties didn't have the opportunity to present their case. - If the settlement is appealed by one of the parties, they have to submit their claims towards the DAO through a forum post, including all the relevant information, plus a signed message on Etherscan to prove they are the owners of the said wallet. The claims must focus on the procedural issues in question if anything related to the substance of the dispute is disclosed then the appeal won't proceed. The counterparty is allowed and encouraged to do the same in reply to the appellant's post.
- Parties have a total of 4 days to present their evidence in the forum. Once this time window passes, the DAO has to vote on the outcome; they have 2 days to do so.
- If the DAO votes in favor of the appellant, then the Judges have to emit a resolution with a different outcome, and Judges could be either slashed or replaced by the DAO depending on the severity of the issue. If one Judge was bribed or engaged in fraudulent behaviour, they will be removed and their agreement with the DAO terminated, resulting in the immediate slashing of their collateral.
- If the DAO decides that there were no procedural issues and the settlement was fair, then the decision of the Judges is executed.`
As some of you pointed out, there are some flaws with this system but imo these are the main ones:
- Having the DAO decide on the outcome of an appeal removes predictability since DAO politicking could interfere with a fair outcome.
- DAO governance could be inefficient since it's uncertain how many voters will show up, making it relatively vulnerable to a 51% attack in order to overturn an appeal.
An alternative would be to have a jury system, where we pick random citizens from a pool of volunteers, where they have to enter a Nation3 agreement with the DAO so that their funds could be slashed in case they don't do their job properly. But this can't be implemented right now and it would take a while to do so, so in the meantime we need an alternative, which is why I want to know what do you all think about this and how we can improve our appeal system.
woven gulch