Final summary to avoid the noise I am the challenger and my evidence speaks for itself. I hope jurors will not fall for the confusion tactics of the requester. * The submitted logo is not the most commonly used and it does NOT appear in major sources such as Badger DAO website, Etherscan, CoinGecko, CoinMarketCap, Telegram, and Twitter. By jurisprudence and existing precedents, this submission should be rejected and resubmitted with the most commonly used logo. * The admin of the Badger Telegram group, who is a credible official source, confirmed that the submitted logo is incorrect.

I checked the facts before I funded the appeal I did not base anything only on my own opinions. I wasn't involved in this case before the appeal, thus I was unbiased. I read through all the evidence and concluded that the jurors of the first round correctly ruled to reject this submission. The submitted logo is NOT the most commonly used logo, in fact, it's only used by 1 single source. All of the other sources consistently the same logo, which DOES NOT match the one submitted to the T2CR. The branding for Badger DAO is therefore clear. The submitter made a mistake by not checking the logos used by all sources, and blindly picked the one from the GitHub, or he simply did not notice the difference. Fact remains that the submitted token symbol is not correct, thus this submission should be removed.

Who said T2CR is not decentralized? You don't read evidences and only base it on your opinions. I contacted badger team member since so far that has been the evidence provided by the challenger to make it also OFFICIALLY NOT AN ISSUE. You can see that the logo is the right logo not the obvious differences in color, object etc where other listings were rejected for. I concur that BADGER is new and ain't branded strongly yet with a smaller background. And why would you not consider Github or Medium official sources? Github is the go-to for core info on a project. Grounds to accept the submission is stronger than you reasons

The T2CR is a decentralized list Whether a random team member finds it an issue or not is completely irrelevant. The T2CR is a decentralized curated list, with its own rules and jurisprudence. A strong jurisprudence exists for rejecting submissions where the submitted logo is not the most commonly used one. In this case, all sources, external AND official, use the same logo, and it does not match the submitted one. The only place where it's used is the GitHub of Badger DAO, which is from where the submitter took the token symbol.

"Not an issue" looks like the jurors didn't check all evidence provided. reached out to another team member and he commented 'not an issue' on the logo submitted.

Not most commonly used logo Submitted logo is not the most commonly used logo. Etherscan, CoinGecko, CoinMarketCap, Coinbase, and the Badger DAO website (https://badger.finance/), Telegram, and Twitter, all use a different logo than was submitted to the T2CR. Therefore, this submission should be rejected.

False assumptions of challenger for his evidences To Jurors, Kindly check the attached evidence and reasoning

Most commonly used logo is preferred in disputes and requester's logo is NOT the most commonly used The requester's examples are invalid because those tokens correctly used their most commonly used logo at the time of submission. On the other hand, the requester's logo is obviously NOT the most commonly used. By jurisprudence, most commonly used logo is preferred in disputes. Please see the following precedents: * MATH: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x19622a0b50c5406f15c5004b50e24d2b0df75219e19a5c1543c53c14fe497fc0 * XIO: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0xdb8a54258ce606dff2c951b7c5e2b5805e75a9d2a1fcb709dc0266a9e4a404da * TRB: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x09f2cd61db099d3f039258d607172fdaa3b0ae9557ae86c75ac615b6a554db1d * 0xBTC: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x460813671e45c824c76b38ce2eeb975d6a261feef3da0b4f1540a2a2657829b9 * KARMA: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0xdfde7ade55ed5cc22b119c8928a3fb45c6296fba836b17f119be73178cae5e71 * COL: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x9c5222486b2969dc0d045ae1df80c0b32bb4c3880a9b41b59cf63af38b436ad7 * YESTRUMP: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x2b293c9b333de030e082a561e6e5b8bb42a780a39484714407509b7f784e81c0 * NOTRUMP: https://tokens.kleros.io/token/0x96fc000c3d08cfc25ef8bb86729d75307494630f1d8c991c503768e13cc95dc0 Both the badger and yellow background are part of the BADGER token logo, so their proportionality is important for the logo to be correct. This has been confirmed officially by Badger DAO as I showed in my last evidence.

Found in project's Github The submitted logo is from the official account in Github https://github.com/Badger-Finance Some registered tokens that have the colored background as part of the official logo, and where proportionality to the main object of the logo varies are CENNZ, XIO, INXT, ART, GTO, CHZ, TRAC, AUDIO. The submission satisfies logo requirements and fully includes the official logo that are MOST necessary for it to be included in the registry. Strict proportionality is not in the listing rules. Above reasons are then enough bases to accept the submission and to vote YES.

The badger should be larger in the logo. Officially confirmed. The badger in the submitted logo is too small. See the BADGER logo on EtherScan, CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko where the badger is a lot larger: * EtherScan: https://etherscan.io/token/images/badger_128.png * Coinmarketcap: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/badger-dao/ * CoinGecko: https://www.coingecko.com/en/coins/badger-dao/ For official confirmation, I messaged the admin of Badger Telegram group (@badgerdao). He confirmed that the badger should be larger. Evidence is attached. The submitted logo is incorrect. This submission should be rejected and resubmitted with the correct logo.

Token challenge The submitted logo is incorrect. Submitted logo URL: https://ipfs.kleros.io/ipfs/QmUiSYmnvpdSLPrUifsDETPgXHdxvnS88wVK4tu7SndUgt/BADGER