Dispute #489

Court Start Date Dispute Status Current Period Time remaining End Date
Non-Technical 2020-11-23 05:56 Already Ruled Execution Already Ruled 2020-12-02 05:21
Arbitrable Creator

Unique Votes in all the rounds

Yes No Refuse to arbitrate Pending
3 0 0 0

Round 0

Yes No Refuse to arbitrate Pending
3 0 0 0
Round 0 Vote Casting Date
Yes 2020-11-27 17:58
Yes 2020-11-28 17:06
Yes 2020-11-25 00:35


Evidences provided by Vagarish

Evidence #1:

Juror thoughts Juror here. I translated this article from spanish to english and read it. I've known Kleros for a long time (proof i my address ofc), and this use case was new to me. One of the criterias for high impact is: "Expand significantly the Kleros knowledge base (explaining the juror process, the flow and structure of dapps that integrate Kleros, the court process, etc).". I believe this submission satisfy this criteria, thus the earlier "enoguh views" discussion is irrelevant.

Evidence #2:

Claps is the metric for Medium articles Please, see attached file.

Evidence #3:

Only 2 shares on twitter Only 2 people have shared this article on twitter. (https://bit.ly/3nX3G4T). Claps are not an indication of shares. Regarding the "fake claps," I do not believe we can prove they are fake as we cannot see who follows another account on Medium (as far as I can see.) I do find it suspicious how this creator could have attracted such a large audience, however. How did your article gain exposure to have even 69 people clapping if you have an otherwise empty Medium account as you say? That being said, I am not sure if 69 claps is even high impact enough according to the guidelines as there is no recommended guidelines for this. Accept: An article, meme or tweet which is shared by at least 50 users. Accept: An article has been read by at least 500 times The article doesn't show how many views or shares it has on other platforms. I only checked twitter but a google search of the URL shows nothing. Unfortunately I do not speak Spanish so I cannot judge if this article is high quality.

Evidence #4:

Article should be accepted This article is a well crafted one proposing a new application of the Kleros protocol to politics. It fullfils two of the criteria for being accepted: 1) have seen by a large audience (68 people clapped it) and 2) expands the kleros knowledge. Regarding the supposedly fake profiles: mi myself are one of the clappers. It did not follow anyone in medium, and usually do not clap articles nor have written any post there. I usually enter with my gmail account. Still, I am a real person. The other clappers are people which do not interact too much with medium. You can easly chek the names. That is, imo, more value for the article that engaged people from outside the crypto ecosystem, so an additional reason for admitting it.

Evidence #5:

Nothing unusual. It is a valid article with valid audience expanding Kleros knowledge. Please, see attached file.

Evidence #6:

Challenge Justification Quite unusual that ALL of the first 30 Medium profiles that gave claps to the article follows only ONE account. And so quite compelling to believe that interactions on the article are >> Made of mainly fake interactions Also, the author’s Medium profile doesn’t have >>Has a significant audience on the platform it is posted as no followers appears on it ( see attached evidence)
Check this Case on Kleros Resolve