Nothing changed during this round Usually appeals are the opportunity to provide new evidences that may change the mind of the jurors. This is not the case in this round, the "Yes" side still use circumvoluted ways to provide weak defense and keep burning money in appeals hoping for juror apathy. This is still the easiest case of your juror Career, Follow the majority of every round, vote NO.

Claimant's Brief for the Third Appeal Contents: Introduction; The "No" Predominance in Previous Voting Should Be Ignored; Common Sense: A Commonly-held Self-evident Truth; How Common Sense Should Be Applied; Application: Everyday Sense of Time of Ordinary People; Conclusion; Notes;

Claimant's Brief for First Appeal Contents: Time Anywhere on Earth is the Logic One The Timestamps Are Trust-minimized Clarifications for the Jurors The General Court Would Be Called to Follow the Jurisprudence (Regarding the very first comment about the description links, this affects the resolve subdomain only. A Github issue was created noting the code change needed. Links can be seen on the court subdomain.)

Ambigus evidence Claimant failed to prove the submission was done on the due date - a screen shot is not a proof Claimant failed to show any jurisprudence on the Kleros court showing that submission time should be considered in local time rather than in UTC. Please provide some clear and hard proof of these both issues

Enjoy the easier case of your Juror Career Yes vote would mean that with a simple VPN, anybody could enjoy a few hours of competition-free Kleros campaign from the comfort of your home. No vote is the only option. Feel free to consult the evidence document attached

Reply Brief in Response to Opposition Based on Publication Date The reply brief is attached. Thank you for your kind attention. Table of Contents: Introduction The Publication Date is Jan 10 in Submitter's Local Time The Program Terms Did Not Exclude Such Time Because Any (Acceptable) Reporting Source Worked in Case 302, Any Time Zone Should Work Predictability Must Be Upheld Money-grab? And Other Comments Conclusion

Jurors, Vote No the opposing party is trying to flood the court under "pieces of evidence" to make you believe this a complex case. This is not. it's a very simple case. as proved on the Document attached. The opposing party, without proof will try to roll back and says that in his time zone he posted on 10/01/2020 without being able to prove it. it's not important, only UTC time should be considered, this is an internet court, only UTC can be a consensus timezone. Don't waste your precious time, Just vote No on this case.

Vote NO This case is an easy win for the No side. The claimant doesn't understand the simple rules of the reward program or acts maliciously by spamming the court with verbose to confuse jurors. please see attached evidence document, this case is quite simple.

Links Please note there are many links for references. Because they are not underlined in the user interface yet, one could read and follow with the cursor, which will show when there are links.